ArticlePloS one2017
The impact of urban regeneration programmes on health and health-related behaviour: Evaluation of the Dutch District Approach 6.5 years from the start.
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 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neighborhood Poverty and Clinic Attendance in the Michigan Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health Through Telemedicine Program.Journal of glaucoma · 2025Article
- Short-term health effects of an urban regeneration programme in deprived neighbourhoods of Barcelona.PloS one · 2024Article
- Built environment stakeholders' experiences of implementing healthy urban development: an exploratory study.Cities & health · 2022Article
- Do inhabitants profit from integrating a public health focus in urban renewal programmes? A Dutch case study.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Regeneración Urbana, Calidad de Vida y Salud - RUCAS project: a Chilean multi-methods study to evaluate the impact of urban regeneration on resident health and wellbeing.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Health Benefits of Physical Activity Related to an Urban Riverside Regeneration.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLarge-scale regeneration programmes to improve the personal conditions and living circumstances in deprived areas may affect health and the lifestyle of the residents. Previous evaluations concluded that a large-scale urban regeneration programme in the Netherlands had some positive effects within 3.5 years. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effects at the longer run.
methodsWith a quasi-experimental research design we assessed changes in the prevalence of general health, mental health, physical activity, overweight, obesity, and smoking between the pre-intervention (2003-04 -mid 2008) and intervention period (mid 2008-2013-14) in 40 deprived target districts and comparably deprived control districts. We used the Difference-in-Difference (DiD) to assess programme impact. Additionally, we stratified analyses by sex and by the intensity of the regeneration programme.
resultsChanges in health and health related behaviours from pre-intervention to the intervention period were about equally large in the target districts as in control districts. DiD impact estimates were inconsistent and not statistically significant. Sex differences in DiD estimates were not consistent or significant. Furthermore, DiD impact estimates were not consistently larger in target districts with more intensive intervention programmes.
conclusionWe found no evidence that this Dutch urban regeneration programme had an impact in the longer run on self-reported health and related behaviour at the area level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.