SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Cradock AL, Barrett JL, Chriqui JF, Evenson KR, Goins KV, Gustat J, Heinrich KM, Perry CK, Scanze M, Schmid TL, Tabak RG, Umstattd Meyer MR, Valko C. Am. J. Health Promot. 2018; 32(3): 657-666.

Affiliation

10 Prevention Research Center, Brown School at Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, MO, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, SAGE Publications)

DOI

10.1177/0890117117738758

PMID

29108441

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess predictors of stated support for policies promoting physically active transportation.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: US counties selected on county-level physical activity and obesity health status. PARTICIPANTS: Participants completing random-digit dialed telephone survey (n = 906). MEASURES: Survey measures assessed stated support for 5 policies to promote physically active transportation, access to active transportation facilities, and time spent in a car. County-level estimates included household car dependence and funding for bicycle-pedestrian projects. ANALYSIS: Multivariable generalized linear mixed models using binary distribution and logit link, accounting for clustering within county.

RESULTS: Respondents supported policies for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians through street improvements (89%), school active transportation programs (75%), employer-funded active commuting incentives (67%), and allocation of public funding (68%) and tax support (56%) for building and maintaining public transit. Residents spending >2 h/d (vs <0.7 hours) in cars were more likely to support street (odds ratio [OR]: 1.87; confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-3.22) and public transit (OR: 1.85; CI: 1.24-2.77) improvements. Residents in counties investing >$1.6 million in bicycle and pedestrian improvements expressed greater support for funding (OR: 1.71; CI: 1.04-2.83) and tax increases (OR: 1.73; CI: 1.08-2.75) for transit improvements compared to those with lower prior investments (<$276 100).

CONCLUSION: Support for policies to enable active transportation is higher where relevant investments in active transportation infrastructure are large (>$1.6 M), public transit is nearby, and respondents drive >2 h/d.

Keywords: SR2S


Language: en

Keywords

active tranpsort; active transportation; car use; driving; physical activity; policy; public transit

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print