Skip to main content

Table 4 The results of multinomial logistic regression analyses for walking ‘FROM’ school

From: Associations of neighborhood built, safety, and social environment with walking to and from school among elementary school-aged children in Chiba, Japan

 

New Town Model

Neighborhood Walkability Model

 

Everyday walkers

(n = 1196)

Frequent walkers

(n = 184)

Everyday walkers

vs frequent walkers

Everyday walkers

(n = 1196)

Frequent walkers

(n = 184)

Everyday walkers

vs frequent walkers

 

OR (95% CI)

P

OR (95% CI)

P

OR (95% CI)

P

OR (95% CI)

P

OR (95% CI)

P

OR (95% CI)

P

School in NT (ref: no)

            

 Yes

0.63(0.30, 1.30)

0.212

0.80(0.35, 1.82)

0.593

1.27(0.73, 2.23)

0.399

      

Neighborhood walkability

            

 Walking facilities

      

0.94(0.62, 1.43)

0.779

0.85(0.53, 1.36)

0.506

0.91(0.67, 1.23)

0.530

 Aesthetics

      

0.92(0.58, 1.45)

0.704

0.90(0.54, 1.50)

0.679

0.98(0.70, 1.38)

0.911

 Traffic safety

      

1.52(0.76, 3.04)

0.232

2.44(1.13, 5.26)

0.023

1.60(0.96, 2.68)

0.074

 Crime safety

      

1.43(0.94, 2.16)

0.094

1.23(0.77, 1.95)

0.382

0.86(0.63, 1.18)

0.359

Social environmental factors

            

 Neighborhood cohesion

1.45(0.81, 2.59)

0.213

2.17(1.15, 4.09)

0.017

1.50(0.96, 2.33)

0.075

1.46(0.81, 2.62)

0.209

2.17(1.14, 4.14)

0.018

1.49(0.95, 2.34)

0.082

 Neighborhood connection

1.17(0.84, 1.63)

0.357

1.15(0.80, 1.67)

0.448

0.99(0.76, 1.28)

0.921

1.07(0.76, 1.50)

0.719

1.03(0.70, 1.51)

0.888

0.97(0.74, 1.26)

0.794

Safety volunteer (ref: No)

            

 Not sure

0.47(0.22, 1.01)

0.051

0.61(0.26, 1.42)

0.248

1.29(0.72, 2.33)

0.395

0.46(0.21, 0.99)

0.046

0.59(0.25, 1.38)

0.222

1.28(0.71, 2.32)

0.411

 Yes

0.57(0.33, 1.00)

0.050

0.63(0.34, 1.16)

0.135

1.09(0.74, 1.62)

0.655

0.56(0.32, 0.99)

0.048

0.62(0.33, 1.15)

0.126

1.09(0.73, 1.62)

0.671

CCTV on school way (ref: No)

            

 Not sure

1.60(0.95, 2.71)

0.077

1.13(0.63, 2.03)

0.684

0.70(0.47, 1.06)

0.090

1.55(0.91, 2.64)

0.105

1.08(0.60, 1.96)

0.791

0.70(0.47, 1.05)

0.084

 Yes

2.81(1.32, 6.01)

0.008

2.09(0.93, 4.70)

0.075

0.74(0.46, 1.19)

0.215

2.82(1.31, 6.08)

0.008

2.07(0.91, 4.71)

0.083

0.74(0.46, 1.18)

0.203

Walking over 100 m alone (ref: No)

            

 Not sure

1.08(0.41, 2.84)

0.871

1.01(0.32, 3.18)

0.990

0.93(0.40, 2.15)

0.865

1.13(0.43, 2.98)

0.802

1.07(0.34, 3.40)

0.910

0.94(0.41, 2.18)

0.893

 Yes

0.97(0.60, 1.56)

0.896

1.81(1.07, 3.07)

0.028

1.87(1.30, 2.69)

< 0.001

1.04(0.64, 1.68)

0.888

1.96(1.15, 3.35)

0.013

1.90(1.31, 2.74)

< 0.001

Parent-perceived influence of COVID-19 (ref: No)

            

 Not sure

2.67(0.40, 17.95)

0.311

1.86(0.27, 12.64)

0.528

0.69(0.16, 3.05)

0.628

2.49(0.38, 16.31)

0.340

1.62(0.24, 10.84)

0.622

0.65(0.15, 2.90)

0.57

 Yes

0.28(0.13, 0.59)

< 0.001

0.60(0.27, 1.34)

0.212

2.15(1.20, 3.88)

0.011

0.32(0.15, 0.69)

0.004

0.68(0.30, 1.57)

0.369

2.16(1.19, 3.92)

0.012

After-school activity

0.61(0.52, 0.71)

< 0.001

0.86(0.73, 1.01)

0.073

1.41(1.24, 1.61)

< 0.001

0.61(0.52, 0.71)

< 0.001

0.86(0.73, 1.02)

0.081

1.42(1.25, 1.62)

< 0.001

R-Squared

            

 Cox & Snell

0.244

     

0.249

     

 Nagelkerke

0.340

     

0.346

     

 McFadden

0.220

     

0.225

     
  1. Adjusted for distance to school, population density, grade, sex, and number of cars owned
  2. Odds ratios were calculated relative to “less frequent walkers” (n = 117), except for everyday walkers (reference group) versus frequent walkers
  3. CCTV, closed-circuit television; CI, confidence interval; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; NT, new town; OR, odds ratio