What This Study Adds…
Elements of the built environment
Recent attention has focused on whether physical activity is associated with the environments in which people live.1, 2, 3 Adults living in neighborhoods that were safe clean and free from traffic were more active.4 Perceived environmental aesthetics were associated with increased walking among urban Australian adults.5 There is a lack of information about the association between environmental factors and the habitual activity levels of adolescents. Although a link has been suggested between self-reported environmental features and activity among adolescents,6 environmental perceptions may not be associated with objective measures,7 and there is a lack of research using objective data. This study used accelerometry and directly observed environmental features to address this issue among 10- to 14-year-old Texan males.
Participants were 210 Boy Scouts (aged 10 to 14) recruited from 36 Boy Scout Troops within the greater Houston area during 2003 and 2004. The Baylor College of Medicine’s Institutional Review Board approved this study. Informed consent was obtained for all participants. Participants’ ethnicity, the highest education achieved within the household (an indicator of socioeconomic status), and residence were obtained by parental self-report. Stature was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a
Descriptive sample characteristics are shown in Table 1. Mean age of participants was 12.8 years, with a mean BMI of 21.1. Participants engaged in an average of 24.8(±17.6) minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day and 137.9(±39.3) minutes of light-intensity physical activity.
The mean percent interobserver agreement across all items was 93%, and >80% for all items included in the environmental factors. The kappa coefficients (ranging from 0.25 to 0.92) were all significant at p
The principal component analysis of the SPACES instrument resulted in four factors: walking/cycling ease; tidiness; sidewalk characteristics; and street access and condition. These four factors accounted for 48.8% of the variance, which is comparable to principal component analyses of physical activity psychosocial variables.18 The factors were derived from Houston data, and may therefore be applicable to other sprawling cities such as Atlanta GA, which have been associated with decreased
The characteristics of sidewalks in adolescent males’ neighborhoods were positively associated with light-intensity physical activity and negatively associated with sedentary activity. This study provides a first insight into the relationship between objectively measured environmental features and adolescent physical activity. Further exploration of these relationships in different populations will more clearly specify these relationships.
Elements of the built environmentWhat This Study Adds…
Various distances are used in different studies, but authors generally use a threshold distance that is easily walkable from home location. The distances used vary from as small as 400 m (Jago, Baranowski, Zakeri, & Harris, 2005), 500 m (Kytta, Broberg, Haybatollahi, & Schmidt-Thome, 2015; Markevych et al., 2016), through to as large as 8.05 km (Gordon-Larsen, Nelson, Page, & Popkin, 2006). One of the main problems with this approach is that the distances employed are rather arbitrary and there is often limited empirical data to support the choice of buffer size.
In the composition of residential environments, two types of facilities are distinguished according to how often people potentially use them: facilities that are used daily – shops and services (butchers, bakers, schools, newsagents and super- or hypermarkets), parks and squares; facilities that are used weekly – shops and services (car repairs, hypermarkets-supermarkets, doctors, mini-markets, pharmacists, post-offices, cafés) and countryside (urban boundary). A distance threshold of 400 m for evaluating the accessibility to shops and services used daily corresponds to thresholds found in the literature, in particular (Cao, Mokhtarian, & Handy, 2009; Föbker & Grotz, 2006; Forsyth, Hearts, Oakes, & Schmitz, 2008; Handy, Cao, & Mokhtarian, 2005; Hoshino, 2010; Jago, Baranowski, Zakeri, & Harris, 2005; Kweon et al., 2010). The distance threshold of 2 km for evaluating the accessibility to shops and services used weekly is mainly based on the empirical knowledge of experts (people working in French local or national planning agencies), who usually consider a maximum distance of 2 km an acceptable commuting distance by bike.