Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Interrelations between walking and cycling domains and relations with other types of physical activity

From: Walking and cycling for commuting, leisure and errands: relations with individual characteristics and leisure-time physical activity in a cross-sectional survey (the ACTI-Cités project)

  Walking Cycling
  Commutinga Leisure Errands Commutinga Leisure Errands
  OR (95 % CI) OR (95 % CI) OR (95 % CI) OR (95 % CI) OR (95 % CI) OR (95 % CI)
Individual and socio-demographic       
 Leisure-time physical activity       
  <1 h per week Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref
  1 h–2 h30 per week 0.96 (0.89–1.03) 1.23 (1.16–1.30) 1.11 (1.05–1.17) 1.26 (1.10–1.45) 1.54 (1.39–1.71) 1.51 (1.34–1.70)
  >2 h30 per week 0.89 (0.82–0.96) 1.53 (1.44–1.62) 1.14 (1.08–1.21) 1.49 (1.28–1.72) 1.80 (1.62–2.00) 1.88 (1.66–2.12)
 Domestic activities       
  <7 h per week Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref
  ≥7 h per week 0.98 (0.92–1.05) 1.29 (1.23–1.35) 1.15 (1.09–1.20) 0.88 (0.79–0.99) 1.07 (0.99–1.16) 0.93 (0.85–1.02)
Walking       
  Commuting       
  No NR Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref
  Yes NR 1.12 (1.06–1.20) 2.37 (2.23–2.53) 1.02 (0.89–1.17) 0.82 (0.73–0.93) 0.72 (0.64–0.82)
 Leisure       
  No Ref NR Ref Ref Ref Ref
  Yes 1.15 (1.08–1.23) NR 2.02 (1.93–2.12) 0.81 (0.71–0.91) 1.98 (1.83–2.14) 0.66 (0.60–0.73)
 Errands       
  No Ref Ref NR Ref Ref Ref
  Yes 2.41 (2.26–2.57) 2.02 (1.96–2.12) NR 0.72 (0.64–0.81) 0.77 (0.71–0.84) 3.12 (2.85–3.43)
 Cycling       
  Commuting       
  No Ref Ref Ref NR Ref Ref
  Yes 1.01 (0.88–1.16) 0.83 (0.74–0.93) 0.65 (0.61–0.76) NR 1.58 (1.38–1.80) 16.09 (14.23–18.19)
 Leisure       
  No Ref Ref Ref Ref NR Ref
  Yes 0.81 (0.72–0.91) 1.94 (1.80–2.10) 0.78 (0.72–0.84) 2.06 (1.79–2.37) NR 10.89 (9.89–11.98)
 Errands       
  No Ref Ref Ref Ref Ref NR
  Yes 0.76 (0.66–0.86) 0.65 (0.59–0.71) 2.97 (2.71–3.25) 14.77 (13.09–16.68) 10.69 (9.71–11.77) NR
  1. Models were adjusted for age, income, health perception, smoking status, leisure screen-time, city density population. Models with commuting as outcome were additionally adjusted on distance to work and time spent at work. Models with leisure and errands as outcome were additionally adjusted on working status. NR: not relevant
  2. aAnalyses were performed among workers only