Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31185987›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of health geographics2019

The Urban Liveability Index: developing a policy-relevant urban liveability composite measure and evaluating associations with transport mode choice.

Carl Higgs, Hannah Badland, Koen Simons, Luke D Knibbs, Billie Giles-Corti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of health geographics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Participatory Systems Mapping for Municipal Prioritization and Planning.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Operationalising the 20-minute neighbourhood.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Carl HiggsNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Healthy Liveable Communities, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Room 12, Building 15, Level 3 RMIT University, 124 Latrobe St, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. carl.higgs@rmit.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-5903-9095
Hannah BadlandCentre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8936-2715
Koen SimonsNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Healthy Liveable Communities, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Room 12, Building 15, Level 3 RMIT University, 124 Latrobe St, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6534-2277
Luke D KnibbsSchool of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Billie Giles-CortiNHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Healthy Liveable Communities, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Room 12, Building 15, Level 3 RMIT University, 124 Latrobe St, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0102-0225

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDesigning healthy, liveable cities is a global priority. Current liveability indices are aggregated at the city-level, do not reflect spatial variation within cities, and are often not aligned to policy or health.

objectivesTo combine policy-relevant liveability indicators associated with health into a spatial Urban Liveability Index (ULI) and examine its association with adult travel behaviours.

methodsWe developed methods to calculate spatial liveability indicators and the ULI for all residential addresses in Melbourne, Australia. Associations between the address-level ULI and adult travel behaviours from the 2012-2014 Victorian Integrated Survey of Travel and Activity (VISTA) (n = 12,323) were analysed using multilevel logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses to evaluate impact of methodological choices on distribution of liveability as assessed by the ULI and associations with travel mode choice were also conducted.

resultsLiveability estimates were calculated for 1,550,641 residential addresses. ULI scores were positively associated with active transport behaviour: for each unit increase in the ULI score the estimated adjusted odds ratio (OR) for: walking increased by 12% (95% Credible Interval: 9%, 15%); cycling increased by 10% (4%, 17%); public transport increased by 15% (11%, 19%); and private vehicle transport decreased by 12% (- 9%, - 15%).

conclusionsThe ULI provides an evidence-informed and policy-relevant measure of urban liveability, that is significantly and approximately linearly associated with adult travel behaviours in the Melbourne context. The ULI can be used to evaluate progress towards implementing policies designed to achieve more liveable cities, identify spatial inequities, and examine relationships with health and wellbeing.

Indexed as

Environment DesignHealth PolicyUrban HealthCitiesCity PlanningHumansTransportationVictoria

Identifiers

PMID31185987
PMCPMC6558748

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.