Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31377707›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

High Life Study protocol: a cross-sectional investigation of the influence of apartment building design policy on resident health and well-being.

Sarah Foster, Clover Maitland, Paula Hooper, Julian Bolleter, Anthony Duckworth-Smith, Billie Giles-Corti, Jonathan Arundel

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  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

7 authors.

Sarah FosterCentre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia sarah.foster@rmit.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-8624-4908
Clover MaitlandCentre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Paula HooperAustralian Urban Design Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Julian BolleterAustralian Urban Design Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Anthony Duckworth-SmithAustralian Urban Design Research Centre, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia.
Billie Giles-CortiCentre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Jonathan ArundelCentre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe rapid increase in apartment construction in Australia has raised concerns about the impacts of poorly designed and located buildings on resident health and well-being. While apartment design policies exist, their content varies across jurisdictions and evidence on their impact on health and well-being is lacking. This cross-sectional observational study (2017-2021) aims to generate empirical evidence to guide policy decisions on apartment development and help to create healthy, equitable higher-density communities. Objectives include to benchmark the implementation of health-promoting apartment design requirements and to identify associations between requirements and resident health and well-being outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eligible buildings in three Australian cities with different apartment design guidelines will be stratified by area disadvantage and randomly selected (~n=99). Building architects, developers and local governments will be approached to provide endorsed development plans from which apartment and building design features will be extracted. Additional data collection includes a resident survey (~n=1000) to assess environmental stressors and health and well-being impacts and outcomes, and geographic information systems measures of the neighbourhood. The study has 85% power to detect a difference of 0.5 SD in the primary outcome of mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale) at a 5% level of significance. Analyses will compare policy compliance and health-promoting design features between cities and area disadvantage groups. Regression models will test whether higher policy compliance (overall and by design theme) is associated with better health and well-being, and the relative contribution of the neighbourhood context. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human Research Ethics Committees of RMIT University (CHEAN B 21146-10/17) and the University of Western Australia (RA/4/1/8735) approved the study protocol. In addition to academic publications, the collaboration will develop specific health-promoting indicators to embed into the monitoring of apartment design policy implementation and impact, and co-design research dissemination materials to facilitate uptake by decision makers.

Indexed as

Environment DesignFacility Design and ConstructionHealth Status IndicatorsHousingResearch DesignCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PromotionHumansObservational Studies as Topicapartment buildingsdesign guidelineshigher densityplanning policypublic health

Identifiers

PMID31377707
PMCPMC6687010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.