4.6 Article

Associations Between Recreational Walking and Attractiveness, Size, and Proximity of Neighborhood Open Spaces

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 100, Issue 9, Pages 1752-1757

Publisher

AMER PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.182006

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Western Australian Health Promotion Foundation (Healthway) [11828]
  2. Australian Research Council [LP0455453]
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [252799, 458668, 301200, 503712]
  4. Healthway
  5. RESIDE
  6. Australian Research Council [LP0455453] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. We examined associations of attractiveness, size, and proximity of multiple neighborhood open spaces (NOSs) with recreational walking. Methods. Adults participating in the Residential Environments (RESIDE) study (n = 1366) in Perth, Australia, reported time spent engaging in recreational walking within their neighborhoods. Park audit data and geographic information systems were used to identify the most attractive, largest, and nearest NOS within a 1.6-km radius from each participant's residential location. Regression analysis was used to examine attributes (attractiveness, size, and proximity) of these open spaces and their associations with participants' recreational walking. Results. Shorter distance to attractive open spaces was associated with doing any recreational walking, but adults with larger attractive open spaces within 1.6 km of their home were more likely to walk 150 minutes or more in a week. Conclusions. For adults, the presence of a large, high-quality park within walking distance of one's home may be more important in promoting sufficient amounts of walking for health benefits than is the presence of an open space within a shorter distance. (Am J Public Health. 2010;100:1752-1757. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.182006)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available