ArticleSSM - population health2016
Built environment assessment: Multidisciplinary perspectives.
Article in SSM - population health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic literature review of built environment effects on physical activity and active transport - an update and new findings on health equity.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2017Pooled it
- What is the effectiveness of obesity related interventions at retail grocery stores and supermarkets? -a systematic review.BMC public health · 2016Pooled it
- Field Experiments on Health and the Built Environment in Urban Settings: A Scoping Review.Current environmental health reports · 2026Article
- Perception of the Food Environment and Availability of Unprocessed and Ultra-Processed Foods in the Households of Brazilian Schoolchildren During the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Adaptation of the Stakeholders' Walkability/Wheelability Audit in Neighborhoods (SWAN) Tool for Individuals With Diverse Disabilities: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- How walkable are our cities for older adults? Mediation of comfort, convenience, and aesthetics.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Who inhabits the built environment? A microbiological point of view on the principal bacteria colonizing our urban areas.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
- Retail food environment in a Brazilian metropolis over the course of a decade: evidence of restricted availability of healthy foods.Public health nutrition · 2022Article
- Scientometric Analysis of The Relationship between a Built Environment and Cardiovascular Disease.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Obesity and the Built Environment: A Reappraisal.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2020Review
- Assessing the Retail Food Environment in Madrid: An Evaluation of Administrative Data against Ground Truthing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Assessing Support for Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups: A Comparison of Urban Food Environments.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Health by Design: Interweaving Health Promotion into Environments and Settings.Frontiers in public health · 2017Article
- Status report, The Public Health and Planning 101 project: strengthening collaborations between the public health and planning professions.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextAs obesity has become increasingly widespread, scientists seek better ways to assess and modify built and social environments to positively impact health. The applicable methods and concepts draw on multiple disciplines and require collaboration and cross-learning. This paper describes the results of an expert team׳s analysis of how key disciplinary perspectives contribute to environmental context-based assessment related to obesity, identifies gaps, and suggests opportunities to encourage effective advances in this arena. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A team of experts representing diverse disciplines convened in 2013 to discuss the contributions of their respective disciplines to assessing built environments relevant to obesity prevention. The disciplines include urban planning, public health nutrition, exercise science, physical activity research, public health and epidemiology, behavioral and social sciences, and economics. Each expert identified key concepts and measures from their discipline, and applications to built environment assessment and action. A selective review of published literature and internet-based information was conducted in 2013 and 2014. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The key points that are highlighted in this article were identified in 2014-2015 through discussion, debate and consensus-building among the team of experts. Results focus on the various disciplines׳ perspectives and tools, recommendations, progress and gaps.
conclusionsThere has been significant progress in collaboration across key disciplines that contribute to studies of built environments and obesity, but important gaps remain. Using lessons from interprofessional education and team science, along with appreciation of and attention to other disciplines׳ contributions, can promote more effective cross-disciplinary collaboration in obesity prevention.
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.