Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Characteristics of the selected articles/studies (N = 42)

From: The neighbourhood physical environment and active travel in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Characteristic Number of articles %
Geographical region
 Africa 1 2.4
 Asia 6 14.3
 Europe 9 21.4
 North America 18 42.9
 Oceania 5 11.9
 South America 3 7.1
Geographical setting
 Urban 34 81.0
 Urban, suburban and/or rural 5 11.9
 Not reported 3 7.1
Study designa
 Cross-sectional 42 100.0
 Longitudinal 0 0.0
 Quasi-experimental 0 0.0
Stratification by characteristic of study area
 Area-level socio-economic status 21 50.0
 Walkability aspects 22 52.4
 Urbanisation 4 9.5
 Demographics 3 7.1
 None 12 28.6
Sample size
  ≤ 100 1 2.4
 101-300 7 16.7
 301-500 15 35.7
 501-1000 9 21.4
 1001 – 2500 6 14.3
  > 2500 4 9.5
Neighbourhood definitiona
 Objective
  Administrative/census area 15 35.7
 Buffer (crow-fly or road-network)
  400-500 m 9 21.4
   ≥ 1000 m 2 4.8
  variable/not fixed 2 4.8
 Perceived
  10-20 min walk from home 13 31.0
  Other participant delimitation 7 16.7
  Unknown 1 2.4
Studies with multiple publications
 SNQLS 6 14.3
 Active Living Study 4 9.5
 BEPAS Seniors 3 7.1
 EpiFloripa Elderly 3 7.1
 HK Elderly 1 3 7.1
 Montreal’s Household Travel Survey 2 4.8
 Single publication from studies with name 12 28.6
 Single publication from studies with no name 9 21.4
Environmental attributes measureda
 Residential density/urbanisation 15 35.7
  Objectively assessed 4 9.5
  Perceived 11 26.2
 Walkability 11 26.2
  Objectively assessed 11 26.2
  Perceived 0 0.0
 Street connectivity 15 35.7
  Objectively assessed 3 7.1
  Perceived 12 28.6
 Access to/availability of services and destinationsb 33 78.6
  Objectively assessed 15 35.7
  Perceived 19 45.2
 Pedestrian & cycling infrastructure 25 59.5
  Objectively assessed 6 14.3
  Perceived 19 45.2
 Aesthetics and cleanliness/order 19 45.2
  Objectively assessed 3 7.1
  Perceived 16 38.1
 Safety and traffic 24 57.1
  Objectively assessed 5 11.9
  Perceived 19 45.2
Active travel measuresa (all self-reported)
 Total walking for transportc 35 83.3
  Continuous – frequency 5 11.9
  Continuous – amount 11 26.2
  Categorical – any, yes/no 10 23.8
  Categorical – 60+ min/week, yes/no 5 11.9
  Categorical – 150+ min/week, yes/no 1 2.4
  Categorical – daily, yes/no 1 2.4
  Categorical – 3 categories/levels 3 7.1
 Within-neighbourhood walking for transportc 4 9.5
  Continuous – frequency 2 4.8
  Continuous – amount 4 9.5
 Total cycling for transport 2 4.8
  Continuous – amount 1 2.4
  Categorical – daily, yes/no 1 2.4
 Active travel (walking + cycling) 5 11.9
  Continuous – frequency 1 2.4
  Continuous – amount 3 7.1
  Categorical – 3 categories/levels 1 2.4
Moderators of environment-active travel associationsa
 Individual
  Socio-demographics 6 14.3
  Psychosocial factors 1 2.4
  Vehicle ownership or driving status 1 2.4
  Health status/functionality 3 7.1
 Environmental
  Area-level income 4 9.5
  Residential density/urbanisation 2 4.8
  Pedestrian infrastructure 1 2.4
  Safety and traffic 2 4.8
  None 25 59.5
  1. aMultiple options allowed in single articles
  2. bOne article had both objective and perceived measures of access to/availability of services and destinations. Hence, the total number of articles is 1 unit smaller than the sum of articles with objectively assessed and perceived measures
  3. cSome articles had more than one measure of walking. Hence, the total number of articles is smaller than the sum of articles with specific measures of walking
Back to article page