Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22788536›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2012

A pre-and-post study of an urban renewal program in a socially disadvantaged neighbourhood in Sydney, Australia.

Bin Jalaludin, Michelle Maxwell, Basema Saddik, Elizabeth Lobb, Roy Byun, Rodrigo Gutierrez, John Paszek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The impact of public policy on socioeconomic equity in physical activity: a systematic review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Tree Canopy Cover Is Best Associated with Perceptions of Greenspace: A Short Communication.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Bin JalaludinCentre for Research, Evidence Management and Surveillance, South Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, Australia. b.jalaludin@unsw.edu.au
Michelle Maxwell
Basema Saddik
Elizabeth Lobb
Roy Byun
Rodrigo Gutierrez
John Paszek

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrban renewal programs aim to target both the physical and social environments to improve the social capital, social connectedness, sense of community and economic conditions of residents of the neighbourhoods. We evaluated the impact of an urban renewal program on the health and well-being of residents of a socially disadvantaged community in south-western Sydney, Australia.

methodsPre- and post-urban renewal program surveys were conducted with householders by trained interviewers. The urban renewal program was conducted over 16 months and consisted of internal upgrades (including internal painting; replacement of kitchens, bathrooms and carpets; general maintenance), external upgrades (including property painting; new fencing, carports, letterboxes, concrete driveways, drainage and landscaping), general external maintenance, and social interventions such as community engagement activities, employment initiatives, and building a community meeting place. The questionnaire asked about demographic characteristics, self-reported physical activity, psychological distress, self-rated health, and perceptions of aesthetics, safety and walkability in the neighbourhood. We used the paired chi-square test (McNemars test) to compare paired proportions. A Bonferroni corrected p-value of <0.0013 denoted statistical significance.

resultsFollowing the urban renewal program we did not find statistically significant changes in perceptions of aesthetics, safety and walkability in the neighbourhood. However, post-urban renewal, more householders reported there were attractive buildings and homes in their neighbourhood (18% vs 64%), felt that they belonged to the neighbourhood (48% vs 70%), that their area had a reputation for being a safe place (8% vs 27%), that they felt safe walking down their street after dark (52% vs 85%), and that people who came to live in the neighbourhood would be more likely to stay rather than move elsewhere (13% vs 54%). Changes in psychological distress and self-rated health were not statistically significant.

conclusionsWe found an increase, in the short-term, in the proportion of householders reporting improvements in some aspects of their immediate neighbourhood following the urban renewal program. It will be important to repeat the survey in the future to determine whether these positive changes are sustained.

Indexed as

Social EnvironmentUrban RenewalVulnerable PopulationsAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProgram EvaluationQuality of LifeResidence CharacteristicsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID22788536
PMCPMC3490782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.