Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28182714›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Individual, employment and psychosocial factors influencing walking to work: Implications for intervention design.

Emma J Adams, Dale W Esliger, Ian M Taylor, Lauren B Sherar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Walking Engagement in Mexican Americans Who Participated in a Community-Wide Step Challenge in El Paso, TX.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Individual Characteristics Associated with Active Travel in Low and High Income Groups in the UK.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Emma J AdamsNational Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5444-6951
Dale W EsligerNational Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
Ian M TaylorNational Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.
Lauren B SherarNational Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPromoting walking for the journey to and from work (commuter walking) is a potential strategy for increasing physical activity. Understanding the factors influencing commuter walking is important for identifying target groups and designing effective interventions. This study aimed to examine individual, employment-related and psychosocial factors associated with commuter walking and to discuss the implications for targeting and future design of interventions.

methods1,544 employees completed a baseline survey as part of the 'Walking Works' intervention project (33.4% male; 36.3% aged <30 years). Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the associations of individual (age, ethnic group, educational qualifications, number of children <16 and car ownership), employment-related (distance lived from work, free car parking at work, working hours, working pattern and occupation) and psychosocial factors (perceived behavioural control, intention, social norms and social support from work colleagues) with commuter walking.

resultsAlmost half of respondents (n = 587, 49%) were classified as commuter walkers. Those who were aged <30 years, did not have a car, had no free car parking at work, were confident of including some walking or intended to walk to or from work on a regular basis, and had support from colleagues for walking were more likely to be commuter walkers. Those who perceived they lived too far away from work to walk, thought walking was less convenient than using a car for commuting, did not have time to walk, needed a car for work or had always travelled the same way were less likely to be commuter walkers.

conclusionsA number of individual, employment-related and psychosocial factors were associated with commuter walking. Target groups for interventions to promote walking to and from work may include those in older age groups and those who own or have access to a car. Multi-level interventions targeting individual level behaviour change, social support within the workplace and organisational level travel policies may be required in order to promote commuter walking.

Indexed as

EmploymentIndividualityAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOrganizational PolicyPsychologyResearch DesignSurveys and QuestionnairesTransportationWalkingWorkplace

Identifiers

PMID28182714
PMCPMC5300108

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.