Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31167430›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Do Differences in Social Environments Explain Gender Differences in Recreational Walking across Neighbourhoods?

Fatima Ghani, Jerome N Rachele, Venurs Hy Loh, Simon Washington, Gavin Turrell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Fatima GhaniInternational Institute for Global Health, United Nations University, Kuala Lumpur 56000, Malaysia. fatima.ghani@unu.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-5528-371X
Jerome N RacheleCentre for Health Equity, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC 3010, Australia. j.rachele@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5101-4010
Venurs Hy LohInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC 3220, Australia. venurs.loh@deakin.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-1821-1087
Simon WashingtonSchool of Civil Engineering, The Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Information Technology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia. hos@civil.uq.edu.au.
Gavin TurrellHealthy Liveable Cities Group, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3001, Australia. gavin.turrell@rmit.edu.au.
Deakin University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AURMIT University · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUnited Nations University-International Institute for Global Health · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Within a city, gender differences in walking for recreation (WfR) vary significantly across neighbourhoods, although the reasons remain unknown. This cross-sectional study investigated the contribution of the social environment (SE) to explaining such variation, using 2009 data from the How Areas in Brisbane Influence healTh and AcTivity (HABITAT) study, including 7866 residents aged 42-67 years within 200 neighbourhoods in Brisbane, Australia (72.6% response rate). The analytical sample comprised 200 neighbourhoods and 6643 participants (mean 33 per neighbourhood, range 8-99, 95% CI 30.6-35.8). Self-reported weekly minutes of WfR were categorised into 0 and 1-840 mins. The SE was conceptualised through neighbourhood-level perceptions of social cohesion, incivilities and safety from crime. Analyses included multilevel binomial logistic regression with gender as main predictor, adjusting for age, socioeconomic position, residential self-selection and neighbourhood disadvantage. On average, women walked more for recreation than men prior to adjustment for covariates. Gender differences in WfR varied significantly across neighbourhoods, and the magnitude of the variation for women was twice that of men. The SE did not explain neighbourhood differences in the gender-WfR relationship, nor the between-neighbourhood variation in WfR for men or women. Neighbourhood-level factors seem to influence the WfR of men and women differently, with women being more sensitive to their environment, although Brisbane's SE did not seem such a factor.

Indexed as

Social EnvironmentWalkingAdultAgedAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansInterpersonal RelationsLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedResidence CharacteristicsSex Factorsbetween-neighbourhood variationecological interventionsgender equalitymultilevel modellingrandom coefficientsrecreational walkingsocial environmentsustainable cities and communitiessustainable development goalsurban planning

Identifiers

PMID31167430
PMCPMC6604242
OpenAlexW2948572378

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.