Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29986679›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

Controlled before-after intervention study of suburb-wide street changes to increase walking and cycling: Te Ara Mua-Future Streets study design.

A K Macmillan, H Mackie, J E Hosking, K Witten, M Smith, A Field, A Woodward, R Hoskins, J Stewart, B van der Werf and 1 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

11 authors.

A K MacmillanDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, 18 Frederick St, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. alex.macmillan@otago.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0001-8070-3280
H MackieMackie Research, Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
J E HoskingSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
K WittenSHORE Whariki, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
M SmithSchool of Nursing, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
A FieldDovetail Research Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.
A WoodwardSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
R HoskinsDesignTribe Architects, Auckland, New Zealand.
J StewartSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
B van der WerfSchool of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
P BaasTERNZ Transport Research, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

Health Research Council of New Zealand 17-013 SmithMinistry for Business Innovation and Employment MRACO1501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAchieving a shift from car use to walking, cycling and public transport in cities is a crucial part of healthier, more environmentally sustainable human habitats. Creating supportive active travel environments is an important precursor to this shift. The longevity of urban infrastructure necessitates retrofitting existing suburban neighbourhoods. Previous studies of the effects of street changes have generally relied on natural experiments, have included few outcomes, and have seldom attempted to understand the equity impacts of such interventions.

methodsIn this paper we describe the design of Te Ara Mua - Future Streets, a mixed-methods, controlled before-after intervention study to assess the effect of retrofitting street changes at the suburb scale on multiple health, social and environmental outcomes. The study has a particular focus on identifying factors that improve walking and cycling to local destinations in low-income neighbourhoods and on reducing social and health inequities experienced by Māori (Indigenous New Zealanders) and Pacific people. Qualitative system dynamics modelling was used to develop a causal theory for the relationships between active travel, and walking and cycling infrastructure. On this basis we selected outcomes of interest. Together with the transport funder, we triangulated best evidence from the literature, transport policy makers, urban design professionals and community knowledge to develop interventions that were contextually and culturally appropriate. Using a combination of direct observation and random sample face to face surveys, we are measuring outcomes in these domains of wellbeing: road-user behaviour, changes to travel mode for short trips, physical activity, air quality, road traffic injuries, greenhouse gas emissions, and perceptions of neighbourhood social connection, safety, and walking and cycling infrastructure . DISCUSSION: While building on previous natural experiments, Te Ara Mua - Future Streets is unique in testing an intervention designed by the research team, community and transport investors together; including a wide range of objective outcome measures; and having an equity focus. When undertaking integrated intervention studies of this kind, a careful balance is needed between epidemiological imperatives, the constraints of transport funding and implementation and community priorities, while retaining the ability to contribute new evidence for healthy, equitable transport policy. The study was retrospectively registered as a clinical trial on 21 June 2018 in the ISCRTN registry: ISRCTN89845334 http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN89845334.

Indexed as

Controlled Clinical Trials as TopicEnvironment DesignExercisePopulation GroupsAdultBicyclingCitiesFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandOutcome Assessment, Health CareResearch DesignResidence CharacteristicsRetrospective StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID29986679
PMCPMC6038249

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.