Increasing active travel: aims, methods and baseline measures of a quasi-experimental study

BMC Public Health

Mark Grams¹  Jean Beetham¹  Dylan Muggeridge¹  Alistair Woodward³  Wokje Abrahamse¹  Karen Witten²  Michael Keall⁴  Philippa Howden-Chapman⁴  Ralph Chapman¹ 

[1] NZ Centre for Sustainable Cities, and Victoria University of Wellington, Environmental Studies Programme, SGEES, P.O. Box 600, Wellington, New Zealand;NZ Centre for Sustainable Cities, and Massey University Whariki, Wellesley St, P.O. Box 6137, Auckland, New Zealand;NZ Centre for Sustainable Cities, and School of Population Health, University of Auckland, 261 Morrin Rd, St Johns, Auckland 1072, New Zealand;Department of Public Health, NZ Centre for Sustainable Cities, University of Otago Wellington, P.O. Box 7343, Wellington South, New Zealand

关键词: New Zealand;    Attitudes;    Active travel;    Physical activity;    Quasi-experimental;    Walking;    Cycling;    Methods;   

Others  :  1127940
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2458-14-935

 received in 2014-06-01, accepted in 2014-08-29,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Policy advisers are seeking robust evidence on the effectiveness of measures, such as promoting walking and cycling, that potentially offer multiple benefits, including enhanced health through physical activity, alongside reductions in energy use, traffic congestion and carbon emissions. This paper outlines the ‘ACTIVE’ study, designed to test whether the Model Communities Programme in two New Zealand cities is increasing walking and cycling. The intervention consists of the introduction of cycle and walkway infrastructure, along with measures to encourage active travel. This paper focuses on the rationale for our chosen study design and methods.

Method

The study design is multi-level and quasi-experimental, with two intervention and two control cities. Baseline measures were taken in 2011 and follow-up measures in 2012 and 2013. Our face-to-face surveys measured walking and cycling, but also awareness, attitudes and habits. We measured explanatory and confounding factors for mode choice, including socio-demographic and well-being variables. Data collected from the same households on either two or three occasions will be analysed using multi-level models that take account of clustering at the household and individual levels. A cost-benefit analysis will also be undertaken, using our estimates of carbon savings from mode shifts. The matching of the intervention and control cities was quite close in terms of socio-demographic variables, including ethnicity, and baseline levels of walking and cycling.

Discussion

This multidisciplinary study provides a strong design for evaluating an intervention to increase walking and cycling in a developed country with relatively low baseline levels of active travel. Its strengths include the use of data from control cities as well as intervention cities, an extended evaluation period with a reasonable response rate from a random community survey and the availability of instrumental variables for sensitivity analyses.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Chapman et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]International Diabetes Federation: Diabetes and Climate Change Report. Brussels: International Diabetes Federation; 2012.
• [2]WHO: Health in the Green Economy: Health co-benefits of climate change mitigation -Transport sector. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
• [3]IPCC, et al.: Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2014, Mitigation of Climate Change Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Edited by Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier B, et al. Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2014.
• [4]Wanless D: Securing good health for the whole population. London: HM Treasury and Department of Health, HMSO; 2004.
• [5]Ogilvie D, Mitchell R, Mutrie N, Petticrew M, Platt SD: Evaluating health effects of transport interventions: methodologic case study. Am J Prev Med 2006, 31:118-126.
• [6]Shaw C, Hales S, Howden-Chapman P, Edwards R: Health co-benefits of climate change mitigation policies in the transport sector. Nature Clim Change 2014, 4(6):427-433.
• [7]Israel B, Eng E, Schulz AJ, Parker EA (Eds): Methods for Community-Based Participatory Research for Health (Second ed.) San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons; 2013.
• [8]Howden-Chapman P, Crane J, Matheson A, Viggers H, Cunningham M, Blakely T, O’Dea D, Cunningham C, Woodward A, Saville-Smith K, Baker M, Waipara N: Retrofitting houses with insulation to reduce health inequalities: aims and methods of a clustered, randomised community-based trial. Soc Sci Med 2005, 61(12):2600-2610.
• [9]Hamer M, Chida Y: Active commuting and cardiovascular risk: a meta-analytic review. Prev Med 2008, 46(1):9-13.
• [10]Giles-Corti B, Foster S, Shilton T, Falconer R: The co-benefits for health of investing in active transportation. New South Wales Public Health Bulletin 2010, 21(6):122-127.
• [11]Raccioppi F, Dora C, Rutter H: Urban Settings and Opportunities for Healthy Lifestyles: Rediscovering Walking and Cycling and Understanding Their Health Benefits. Built Environ 2005, 31(4):302-314.
• [12]Yang L, Sahlqvist S, McMinn A, Griffin SJ, Ogilvie D: Interventions to promote cycling: systematic review. British Med J 2010., 341doi:10.1136/bmj.c5293
• [13]Wanner M, Götschi T, Martin-Diener E, Kahlmeier S, Martin BW: Active transport, physical activity, and body weight in adults: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 2012, 42(5):493-502.
• [14]Østergaard L, Børrestad LA, Tarp J, Andersen LB: Bicycling to school improves the cardiometabolic risk factor profile: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 2012., 2(6) doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001307
• [15]Larouche R, Saunders TJ, Faulkner GEJ, Colley R, Tremblay M: Associations Between Active School Transport and Physical Activity, Body Composition, and Cardiovascular Fitness: A Systematic Review of 68 Studies. J Phys Act Health 2014, 11(1):206-227.
• [16]Lubans DR, Boreham CA, Kelly P, Foster CE: The relationship between active travel to school and health-related fitness in children and adolescents: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011., 8(5) doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-5
• [17]Schoeppe S, Duncan MJ, Badland H, Oliver M, Curtis C: Associations of children’s independent mobility and active travel with physical activity, sedentary behaviour and weight status: A systematic review. J Sci Med Sport 2013, 16(4):312-319.
• [18]Tin Tin S, Woodward A, Thornley S, Ameratunga S: Cycling and walking to work in New Zealand, 1991–2006: regional and individual differences, and pointers to effective interventions. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2009., 6(64) doi:10.1186/1479-5868-1186-1164
• [19]Keall M, Chapman R, Howden-Chapman P: Changes in frequency of walking and cycling trips in New Zealand: Potential influences of urban form. In Sizing Up The City: Urban form and transport in New Zealand. Edited by Howden-Chapman P, Stuart K, Chapman R. Wellington: Steele Roberts Ltd; 2010:52-57.
• [20]Steg L, Vlek C: Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 2009, 29:309-317.
• [21]Pucher J, Dill J, Handy S: Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. Prev Med 2010, 50:S106-S125.
• [22]Schweizer C, Racioppi F, Nemer L: Developing national action plans on transport, health and environment: A step-by-step manual for policy-makers and planners. In Transport Health and Environment Pan European Programme. Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; 2014.
• [23]UNECE: Amsterdam Declaration: making THE link: transport choices for our health, environment and prosperity. Geneva: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe; 2009.
• [24]Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Black JB: Neighbourhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health 2003, 93(9):1552-1558.
• [25]Pucher J, Dijkstra L: Promoting Safe Walking and Cycling to Improve Public Health: Lessons from The Netherlands and Germany. Am J Public Health 2003, 93:9.
• [26]Ogilvie D, Foster C, Rothnie H, Cavill N, Hamilton V, Fitzsimons C, Mutrie N: Interventions to promote walking: Systematic review. Br Med J 2007, 334(7605):1204-1207.
• [27]Powell J, Dalton A, Brand C, Ogilvie D: The Health Economic Case for Infrastructure to Promote ActiveTravel: A Critical Review. Built Environ 2010, 36(4):504-518.
• [28]Ogilvie D, Egan M, Hamilton V, Petticrew M: Promoting walking and cycling as an alternative to using cars: systematic review. Br Med J 2004, 329(7469):763-767.
• [29]Krizek KJ, Handy S, Forsyth A: Explaining changes in walking and bicycling behavior: challenges for transportation research. Environ Planning B 2009, 36:725-740.
• [30]Götschi T, Krizek KJ, McGinnis L, Lucke J, Barbeau J: Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program Evaluation Study Phase 2 (CTS 11–13). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Transportation Studies; 2014.
• [31]Ogilvie D, Bull F, Powell J, Cooper AR, Brand C, Mutrie N, Preston J, Rutter H: An applied ecological framework for evaluating infrastructure to promote walking and cycling: the iConnect study. Am J Public Health 2011, 101(3):473-481.
• [32]Goodman A, Sahlqvist S, Ogilvie D: Who uses new walking and cycling infrastructure and how? Longitudinal results from the UK iConnect study. Prev Med 2013, 57(5):518-524.
• [33]Badland HM, Garrett N, Schofield GM: How does car parking availability and public transport accessibility influence work-related travel behaviors? Sustainability 2010, 2:576-590.
• [34]Rissel C, Greaves S, Wen LM, Capon A, Crane M, Standen C: Evaluating the transport, health and economic impacts of new urban cycling infrastructure in Sydney, Australia–protocol paper. BMC Public Health 2013, 13(1):963. BioMed Central Full Text
• [35]Heinen E, van Wee B, Maat K: Commuting by Bicycle: An Overview of the Literature. Transp Rev 2010, 30(1):59-96.
• [36]Van Holle V, Deforche B, Van Cauwenberg J, Goubert L, Maes L, Van de Weghe N, De Bourdeaudhuij I: Relationship between the physical environment and different domains of physical activity in European adults: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 2012, 12(1):807. BioMed Central Full Text
• [37]Elvik R: The non-linearity of risk and the promotion of environmentally sustainable transport. Accident Analysis Prevention 2009, 41:849-855.
• [38]Jacobsen PL: Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Injury Prevention 2003, 9:205-209.
• [39]Robinson DL: Safety in numbers in Australia: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Health Promotion J Australia 2005, 16(1):47-51.
• [40]Randall T, Baetz B: Evaluating pedestrian connectivity for suburban sustainability. J Urban Plan Dev 2001, 127:1-15.
• [41]Boarnet M, Crane R: The influence of land use on travel behavior: specification and estimation strategies. Transp Res A 2001, 35:823-845.
• [42]Hillsdon M, Panter J, Foster C, Jones A: The relationship between access and quality of urban green space with population physical activity. Public Health 2006, 120:1127-1132.
• [43]Nagel CL, Carlson NE, Bosworth M, Michael YL: The relation between neighborhood built environment and walking activity among older adults. Am J Epidemiol 2008, 168(4):461-468.
• [44]Nankervis M: The effects of weather and climate on urban bicycle commuters’ decisions to ride; a pilot survey. Road Transport Res 1999, 8:85-97.
• [45]Garrard J, Rose G, Lo SK: Promoting transportation cycling for women: the role of bicycle infrastructure. Prev Med 2008, 46:55-59.
• [46]Aarts H, Verplanken B, Van Knippenberg A: Predicting behaviour from actions in the past: Repeated decision making or a matter of habit? J Appl Soc Psychol 1998, 28:1355-1374.
• [47]Verplanken B, Aarts H, Van Knippenberg A, Moonen A: Habit versus planned behaviour: A field experiment. Br J Soc Psychol 1998, 37:111-128.
• [48]de Bruijn GJ, Kremers SPJ, Singh A, van den Putte B, van Mechelen W: Adult Active Transportation: Adding Habit Strength to the Theory of Planned Behavior. Am J Prev Med 2009, 36:189-194.
• [49]Ministry of Transport: Comparing travel modes: Household Travel Survey. v14 edition. Wellington: Ministry of Transport; 2008a.
• [50]Ministry of Transport: Walking for transport: Ongoing New Zealand Household Travel Survey 2003 – 2007. In Ministry of Transport. Wellington: Ministry of Transport; 2008b.
• [51]Sloman L, Cavill N, Cope A, Muller L, Kennedy A: Analysis and synthesis of evidence on the effects of investment in six Cycling Demonstration Towns: ’Report for Department for Transport and Cycling England. London: Department for Transport; 2009.
• [52]The Marmot Review: Fair Society, Healthy Lives: Strategic Review of Health Inequalities in England Post-2010. London: The Marmot Review; 2010.
• [53]Commission on Social Determinants of Health: Closing the Gap in a Generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
• [54]NZTA: Model Communities Information Sheet. Wellington: New Zealand Transport Agency; 2011.
• [55]NZTA: The Walking and Cycling Model Community Story with New Plymouth and Hastings. Wellington: New Zealand Transport Agency; 2013.
• [56]Campbell DT, Stanley JC, Gage NL: Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin Boston; 1963.
• [57]Reichardt CS: Quasi-experimental design. The SAGE handbook of quantitative methods in psychology 2009, 46-71.
• [58]Anderson LM, Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Armstrong R, Ueffing E, Baker P, Francis D, Tugwell P: Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Res Synthesis Methods 2011, 2(1):33-42.
• [59]IPAQ Research Committee: International Physical Activity Questionnaire (Long last 7 days self-administered format). Stockholm: Sweden IPAQ Research Committee; 2002.