Multi-level examination of correlates of active transportation to school among youth living within 1 mile of their school

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

Ian Janssen³  William Pickett¹  Kathleen M Gropp² 

[1] Department of Emergency Medicine, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada;Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada;School of Kinesiology and Health Studies, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada

关键词: Neighborhood;    School;    Adolescent;    Active transportation;   

Others  :  811620
DOI  :  10.1186/1479-5868-9-124

 received in 2012-01-19, accepted in 2012-10-10,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Active transportation to school is a method by which youth can build physical activity into their daily routines. We examined correlates of active transportation to school at both individual- (characteristics of the individual and family) and area- (school and neighborhood) levels amongst youth living within 1 mile (1.6 km) of their school.

Methods

Using the 2009/10 Canadian Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) survey, we selected records of students (n = 3 997) from 161 schools that resided in an urban setting and lived within 1 mile from their school. Student records were compiled from: (1) individual-level HBSC student questionnaires; (2) area-level administrator (school) questionnaires; and (3) area-level geographic information system data sources. The outcome, active transportation to school, was determined via a questionnaire item describing the method of transportation that individual students normally use to get to school. Analyses focused on factors at multiple levels that potentially contribute to student decisions to engage in active transportation. Multi-level logistic regression analyses were employed.

Results

Approximately 18% of the variance in active transportation was accounted for at the area-level. Several individual and family characteristics were associated with engagement in active transportation to school including female gender (RR vs. males = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.91), having ≥2 cars in the household (RR vs. no cars = 0.87, 0.74-0.97), and family socioeconomic status (RR for ‘not well off’ vs. ‘very well off’ = 1.14, 1.01-1.26). Neighborhood characteristics most strongly related to active transportation were: the length of roads in the 1 km buffer (RR in quartile 4 vs. quartile 1 = 1.23, 1.00-1.42), the amount of litter in the neighborhood (RR for ‘major problem’ vs. ‘no problem’ = 1.47, 1.16-1.57), and relatively hot climates (RR in quartile 4 vs. quartile 1 = 1.33 CI, 1.05-1.53).

Conclusion

Engagement in active transportation to school was related to multiple factors at multiple levels. We identified gender, perception of residential neighborhood safety, the percentage of streets with sidewalks, and the total length of roads as the most important correlates of active transportation to school.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Gropp et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sallis JF, Frank LD, Saelens BE, Kraft MK: Active transportation and physical activity: opportunities for collaboration on transportation and public health research. Transport Res A-Pol 2004, 38:249-268.
• [2]Dollman J, Lewis NR: Active transport to school as part of a broader habit of walking and cycling among South Australian youth. Pediatr Exerc Sci 2007, 19:436-443.
• [3]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. BioMed Central Full Text
• [4]Buliung RN, Mitra R, Faulkner G: Active school transportation in the Greater Toronto Area, Canada: an exploration of trends in space and time (1986–2006). Prev Med 2009, 48:507-512.
• [5]Ham SA, Martin S, Kohl HW: Changes in the percentage of students who walk or bike to school-United States, 1969 and 2001. J Phy Act Health 2008, 5:205-215.
• [6]Babey SH, Hasert TA, Huang W, Brown ER: Sociodemographic, family, and environmental factors associated with active commuting to school among US adolescents. J Public Health Policy 2009, 30:203-220.
• [7]McDonald NC: Active transportation to school. Am J Prev Med 2007, 32:509-516.
• [8]McMillan TE: The relative influence of urban form on a child’s travel mode to school. Trans Res A 2007, 41:69-79.
• [9]Larsen K, Gilliland J, Hess P, Tucker P, Irwin J, He M: The influence of the physical environment and sociodemographic characteristics on children’s mode of travel to and from school. Am J Public Health 2009, 99:520-526.
• [10]Robertson-Wilson JE, Leatherdale ST, Wong SL: Social-ecological correlates of active commuting to school among high school students. J Adolesc Health 2008, 42:486-495.
• [11]Bungum T, Lounsbery M, Moonie S, Gast J: Prevalence and correlates of walking and biking to school among adolescents. J Commun Health 2009, 34:129-134.
• [12]Braza M, Shoemaker W, Seeley A: Neighborhood design and rates of walking and biking to elementary school in 34 California communities. Am J Health Promot 2004, 19:128-136.
• [13]Evenson KR, Huston SL, McMillen BJ, Bors P, Ward DS: Statewide prevalence and correlates of walking and bicycling to school. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003, 157:887-892.
• [14]Pabayo R, Gauvin L, Barnett TA: Longitudinal changes in active transportation to school in Canadian youth aged 6 through 16 years. Pediatrics 2011, 128:e404-e413.
• [15]Pabayo RA, Gauvin L, Barnett TA, Morency P, Nikiema B, Seguin L: Understanding the determinants of active transportation to school among children: evidence of environmental injustice from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. Health Place 2012, 18:163-171.
• [16]Merom D, Tudor-Locke C, Bauman A, Rissel C: Active commuting to school among NSW primary school children: implications for public health. Health Place 2006, 12:678-687.
• [17]Ewing R, Schroeer W, Greene W: School location and student travel: analysis of factors affecting mode choice. Transport Res Rec 2004, 1895:55-63.
• [18]Martin SL, Lee SM, Lowry R: National prevalence and correlates of walking and bicycling to school. Am J Prev Med 2007, 33:98-105.
• [19]Boarnet MG, Anderson CL, Day K, McMillan T, Alfonzo M: Evaluation of the California Safe Routes to School legislation: urban form changes and children’s active transportation to school. Am J Prev Med 2005, 28:134-140.
• [20]Wong BY, Faulkner G, Buliung R: GIS measured environmental correlates of active school transport: a systematic review of 14 studies. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2011, 8:39. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]McDonald NC: Critical factors for active transportation to school among low-income and minority students. Evidence from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey. Am J Prev Med 2008, 34:341-344.
• [22]McDonald NC, Deakin E, Aalborg AE: Influence of the social environment on children’s school travel. Prev Med 2010, 50(Suppl 1):S65-S68.
• [23]Sirard JR, Ainsworth BE, McIver KL, Pate RR: Prevalence of active commuting at urban and suburban elementary schools in Columbia, SC. Am J Prev Med 2009, 95:236-237.
• [24]Kerr J, Rosenberg D, Sallis JF, Saelens BE, Frank LD, Conway TL: Active commuting to school: Associations with environment and parental concerns. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006, 38:787-794.
• [25]Booth ML, Okely AD, Denney-Wilson E, Hardy LL, Dobbins T, Wen L, Rissel C: Characteristics of travel to and from school among adolescents in NSW, Australia. J Paediatr Child Health 2007, 45:755-761.
• [26]Timperio A, Ball K, Salmon J, Roberts R, Giles-Corti B, Simmons D, Baur LA, Crawford D: Personal, family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am J Prev Med 2006, 30:45-51.
• [27]Currie C, Nic Gabhainn S, Godeau E: The Health Behaviour in School-aged Children: WHO Collaborative Cross-National (HBSC) study: origins, concept, history and development 1982–2008. Int J Public Health 2009, 54(Suppl 2):131-139.
• [28]Bow CJ, Waters NM, Faris PD, Seidel JE, Galbraith PD, Knudtson ML, Ghali WA: Accuracy of city postal code coordinates as a proxy for location of residence. Int J Health Geogr 2004, 3:5. BioMed Central Full Text
• [29]Roberts C, Alexander D, Currie D, Haug E, Komkov A, Tynajala J: Physical activity. In Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC): Research protocol for the 2005/06 survey. Edinburgh: Child and Adolescent Health Research Unit; 2006.
• [30]Clarke P, Ailshire J, Melendez R, Bader M, Morenoff J: Using Google Earth to conduct a neighborhood audit: reliability of a virtual audit instrument. Health Place 2010, 16:1224-1229.
• [31]Janssen I, Rosu A: Measuring sidewalk distances using Google Earth. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012, 12:39. BioMed Central Full Text
• [32]Dill J: Measuring network connectivity for bicycling and walking. Washington, D.C: Transport Research Board 2004 Annual Meeting (CD-ROM); 2004.
• [33]Tresidder M: Using GIS to Measure Connectivity: An Exploration of Issues. School of Urban Studies and Planning: Portland State University; 2005.
• [34]Mecredy G, Pickett W, Janssen I: Street connectivity is negatively associated with physical activity in Canadian youth. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2011, 8:3333-3350.
• [35]Snijders TAB, Bosker RJ: Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 1999.
• [36]Cerin E, Saelens BE, Sallis JF, Frank LD: Neighborhood environment Walkability scale: validity and development of a short form. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2006, 38:1682-1691.
• [37]de Vries SI, Hopman-Rock M, Bakker I, Hirasing RA, van Mechelen W: Built environmental correlates of walking and cycling in Dutch urban children: results from the SPACE study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2010, 7:2309-2324.
• [38]Zhang J, Yu KF: What’s the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA 1998, 280:1690-1691.
• [39]Rothman KJ, Greenland S: Modern epidemiology. New York, NY: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins; 1998.
• [40]McDonald NC: Children’s mode choice for the school trip: the role of distance and school location in walking to school. Transportation 2008, 35:22-35.
• [41]Ward DS, Saunders R, Felton GM, Williams E, Epping JN, Pate RR: Implementation of a school environment intervention to increase physical activity in high school girls. Health Educ Res 2006, 21:896-910.
• [42]ENACT strategy: safe communities. [ http://eatbettermovemore.org/sa/enact/neighborhood/safety.php? webcite]