File(s) under permanent embargo
Area variation in recreational cycling in Melbourne : a compositional or contextual effect?
journal contribution
posted on 2008-10-01, 00:00 authored by C Kamphuis, K Giskes, A Kavanagh, Lukar ThorntonLukar Thornton, L Thomas, F van Lenthe, J Mackenbach, Gavin TurrellObjective: To examine whether compositional and/or contextual area characteristics are associated with area socioeconomic inequalities and between-area differences in recreational cycling.
Setting: The city of Melbourne, Australia.
Participants: 2349 men and women residing in 50 areas (58.7% response rate).
Main outcome measure: Cycling for recreational purposes (at least once a month vs never).
Design: In a cross-sectional survey participants reported their frequency of recreational cycling. Objective area characteristics were collected for their residential area by environmental audits or calculated with Geographic Information Systems software. Multilevel logistic regression models were performed to examine associations between recreational cycling, area socioeconomic level, compositional characteristics (age, sex, education, occupation) and area characteristics (design, safety, destinations or aesthetics).
Results: After adjustment for compositional characteristics, residents of deprived areas were less likely to cycle for recreation (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.43 to 1.00), and significant between-area differences in recreational cycling were found (median odds ratio 1.48 (95% credibility interval 1.24 to 1.78). Aesthetic characteristics tended to be worse in deprived areas and were the only group of area characteristics that explained some of the area deprivation differences. Safety characteristics explained the largest proportion of between-area variation in recreational cycling.
Conclusion: Creating supportive environments with respect to safety and aesthetic area characteristics may decrease between-area differences and area deprivation inequalities in recreational cycling, respectively.
Setting: The city of Melbourne, Australia.
Participants: 2349 men and women residing in 50 areas (58.7% response rate).
Main outcome measure: Cycling for recreational purposes (at least once a month vs never).
Design: In a cross-sectional survey participants reported their frequency of recreational cycling. Objective area characteristics were collected for their residential area by environmental audits or calculated with Geographic Information Systems software. Multilevel logistic regression models were performed to examine associations between recreational cycling, area socioeconomic level, compositional characteristics (age, sex, education, occupation) and area characteristics (design, safety, destinations or aesthetics).
Results: After adjustment for compositional characteristics, residents of deprived areas were less likely to cycle for recreation (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.43 to 1.00), and significant between-area differences in recreational cycling were found (median odds ratio 1.48 (95% credibility interval 1.24 to 1.78). Aesthetic characteristics tended to be worse in deprived areas and were the only group of area characteristics that explained some of the area deprivation differences. Safety characteristics explained the largest proportion of between-area variation in recreational cycling.
Conclusion: Creating supportive environments with respect to safety and aesthetic area characteristics may decrease between-area differences and area deprivation inequalities in recreational cycling, respectively.
History
Journal
Journal of epidemiology and community healthVolume
62Issue
10Pagination
890 - 898Publisher
British Medical AssociationLocation
London, EnglandPublisher DOI
ISSN
0143-005XeISSN
1470-2738Language
engPublication classification
C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journalUsage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedKeywords
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC