Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31500596›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Assessing the micro-scale environment using Google Street View: the Virtual Systematic Tool for Evaluating Pedestrian Streetscapes (Virtual-STEPS).

Madeleine Steinmetz-Wood, Kabisha Velauthapillai, Grace O'Brien, Nancy A Ross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Validation of desk-based audits using Google Street ViewInternational journal of health geographics · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Madeleine Steinmetz-WoodDepartment of Geography, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke St W, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada. madeleine.steinmetz-wood@mail.mcgill.ca.
Kabisha VelauthapillaiMcGill School of Environment, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke St W, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.
Grace O'BrienMcGill School of Environment, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke St W, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.
Nancy A RossDepartment of Geography, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke St W, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAltering micro-scale features of neighborhood walkability (e.g., benches, sidewalks, and cues of social disorganization or crime) could be a relatively cost-effective method of creating environments that are conducive to active living. Traditionally, measuring the micro-scale environment has required researchers to perform observational audits. Technological advances have led to the development of virtual audits as alternatives to observational field audits with the enviable properties of cost-efficiency from elimination of travel time and increased safety for auditors. This study examined the reliability of the Virtual Systematic Tool for Evaluating Pedestrian Streetscapes (Virtual-STEPS), a Google Street View-based auditing tool specifically designed to remotely assess micro-scale characteristics of the built environment.

methodsWe created Virtual-STEPS, a tool with 40 items categorized into 6 domains (pedestrian infrastructure, traffic calming and streets, building characteristics, bicycling infrastructure, transit, and aesthetics). Items were selected based on their past abilities to predict active living and on their feasibility for a virtual auditing tool. Two raters performed virtual and field audits of street segments in Montreal neighborhoods stratified by the Walkscore that was used to determine the 'walking-friendliness' of a neighborhood. The reliability between virtual and field audits (n = 40), as well as inter-rater reliability (n = 60) were assessed using percent agreement, Cohen's Kappa statistic, and the Intra-class Correlation Coefficient.

resultsVirtual audits and field audits (excluding travel time) took similar amounts of time to perform (9.8 versus 8.2 min). Percentage agreement between virtual and field audits, and for inter-rater agreement was 80% or more for the majority of items included in the Virtual-STEPS tool. There was high reliability between virtual and field audits with Kappa and ICC statistics indicating that 20 out of 40 (50.0%) items had almost perfect agreement and 13 (32.5%) items had substantial agreement. Inter-rater reliability was also high with 17 items (42.5%) with almost perfect agreement and 11 (27.5%) items with substantial agreement.

conclusionsVirtual-STEPS is a reliable tool. Tools that measure the micro-scale environment are important because changing this environment could be a relatively cost-effective method of creating environments that are conducive to active living.

Indexed as

User-Computer InterfaceBicyclingBuilt EnvironmentHumansPedestriansReproducibility of ResultsResidence CharacteristicsWalkingActive livingAuditBuilt environmentGoogle Street ViewMicro-scalePedestrianPhysical activityVirtualWalkability

Identifiers

PMID31500596
PMCPMC6734502

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.