4.4 Article

The Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Association Between Perceived Neighborhood Walkability Characteristics and Depressive Symptoms in Older Latinos: The !Caminemos! Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGING AND HEALTH
卷 27, 期 3, 页码 551-568

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0898264314553211

关键词

older adults; Hispanics/Latinos; depressive symptoms; neighborhood/environment

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health [R01 AG024460-05, P30AG028748, K24AG047899]
  2. University of California, Los Angeles, Resource Centers for Minority Aging Research Center for Health Improvement of Minority Elderly (RCMAR/CHIME) under NIH/NIA Grant [P30-AG021684]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Evaluate the cross-sectional and longitudinal association between perceived walkability-related neighborhood characteristics (e.g., traffic safety) and depressive symptoms among community-dwelling older Latino adults. Method: We used baseline, 12-month, and 24-month in-person interview data collected from Latinos aged >= 60 years participating in an exercise intervention at 27 senior centers (N = 570). Results: In cross-sectional analyses, lower perceived neighborhood crime, indicative of greater neighborhood walkability, was associated with a lower odds of elevated symptoms of depression (odds ratio [OR] = 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.82, 0.996]; p = .04) after adjusting for demographic characteristics, linguistic acculturation, and medical comorbidities. Associations between Neighborhood Environment Walkability scales and incident depressive symptoms at 12- and/or 24-months were not statistically significant, but the point estimate for crime safety was consistent with cross-sectional findings (OR = 0.83; 95% CI = [0.64, 1.07]; p = .16), suggesting a protective effect for lower perceived neighborhood crime. Discussion: Lower perceived neighborhood crime is associated with reduced presence of elevated symptoms of depression in older Latinos.

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

4.4
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