Environmental perceptions as mediators of the relationship between the objective built environment and walking among socio-economically disadvantaged women

Table 4 Regression analyses for possible mediators of the associations between the destinations/connectivity score and leisure-time walking

Possible mediators	α (SE)	95% CI for α	β (SE)	95% CI for β	αβ (SE)	95% CI for αβ	Proportion mediated (%)
Aesthetics	−0.02 (0.005)	−0.03, -0.01	0.54 (0.20)	0.15, 0.94	−0.01 (0.005)	−0.02, -0.001	12.0
Physical activity environment	0.01 (0.004)	0.001, 0.02	1.44 (0.20)	1.05, 1.82	0.01 (0.006)	0.002, 0.03	S
Personal safety	−0.04 (0.007)	−0.05, -0.03	0.45 (0.13)	0.19, 0.71	−0.02 (0.006)	−0.03, -0.006	20.0
Neighbourhood social cohesion	−0.02 (0.004)	−0.03, -0.01	0.60 (0.21)	0.19, 1.00	−0.01 (0.005)	−0.02, -0.003	13.3
Total multiple model					−0.02 (0.01)	−0.04, -0.001	24.4

SE standard error, CI confidence interval, S suppression effect.
All significant associations are presented in bold font.
Notes: α–coefficients were estimated by regressing the potential mediators onto the destinations/connectivity z-score; β-coefficients were estimated by regressing leisure-time walking onto the destinations/connectivity z-score and potential mediators; αβ-coefficients represent the mediated effect; all possible mediators were positively scored (higher score = better perceptions); all analyses were controlled for individual-level age, smoking status, marital status, employment status and educational level.

ISSN: 1479-5868