ArticleBMJ open2020
Walkability and its association with walking/cycling and body mass index among adults in different regions of Germany: a cross-sectional analysis of pooled data from five German cohorts.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Non-traditional data sources in obesity research: a systematic review of their use in the study of obesogenic environments.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2023Pooled it
- Pavements to Longevity: The Influence of Neighborhood Walkability on Mortality in Taiwan.Environmental health perspectives · 2025Article
- Development of an objectively measured walkability index for the Netherlands.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine three walkability measures (points of interest (POI), transit stations and impedance (restrictions to walking) within 640 m of participant's addresses) in different regions in Germany and assess the relationships between walkability, walking/cycling and body mass index (BMI) using generalised additive models.
settingFive different regions and cities of Germany using data from five cohort studies.
participantsFor analysing walking/cycling behaviour, there were 6269 participants of a pooled sample from three cohorts with a mean age of 59.2 years (SD: 14.3) and of them 48.9% were male. For analysing BMI, there were 9441 participants of a pooled sample of five cohorts with a mean age of 62.3 years (SD: 12.8) and of them 48.5% were male. OUTCOMES: (1) Self-reported walking/cycling (dichotomised into more than 30 min and 30 min and less per day; (2) BMI calculated with anthropological measures from weight and height.
resultsHigher impedance was associated with lower prevalence of walking/cycling more than 30 min/day (prevalence ratio (PR): 0.95; 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97), while higher number of POI and transit stations were associated with higher prevalence (PR 1.03; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.05 for both measures). Higher impedance was associated with higher BMI (ß: 0.15; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.25) and a higher number of POI with lower BMI (ß: -0.14; 95% CI -0.24 to 0.04). No association was found between transit stations and BMI (ß: 0.005, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.12). Stratified by cohort we observed heterogeneous associations between BMI and transit stations and impedance.
conclusionWe found evidence for associations of walking/cycling with walkability measures. Associations for BMI differed across cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.