4.6 Article

Neighbourhood deprivation and physical activity in UK older adults

期刊

HEALTH & PLACE
卷 17, 期 2, 页码 633-640

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2011.01.002

关键词

Older adults; Physical activity; Multiple deprivation; Physical function; Accelerometry

资金

  1. UK National Prevention Research Initiative
  2. National Prevention Research Initiative
  3. British Heart Foundation
  4. Cancer Research UK
  5. Department of Health
  6. Economic and Social Research Council
  7. Medical Research Council
  8. Research and Development Office for the Northern Ireland Health and Social Services
  9. Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Executive Health Department
  10. Welsh Assembly Government
  11. World Cancer Research Fund
  12. Bristol Primary Care Trust
  13. South West General Practitioners Trust
  14. Diabetes UK
  15. Medical Research Council [G0501312] Funding Source: researchfish
  16. MRC [G0501312] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The benefits of regular physical activity for older adults are now well-established but this group remain the least active sector of the population. In this paper, the association between levels of neighbourhood deprivation and physical activity was assessed. A sample of 125 males with a mean age of 77.5 (+/- 5.6) years, and 115 females with a mean age of age 78.6 (+/- 8.6) underwent 7-day accelerometry, a physical performance battery, and completed a daily journeys log. Univariate associations between physical activity parameters and level of deprivation of neighbourhood were extinguished in regression models controlling for age, gender, and level of educational attainment. Age, gender, educational attainment, body mass index, physical function, and frequency of journeys from the home explained between 50% and 54% of variance in activity parameters. These results suggest the importance of strategies to help older adults maintain physical function, healthy weight, and remain active in their communities. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据