Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32419079›Full record

ArticleJournal of community health2021

A Scoping Review of Bikeability Assessment Methods.

Debra K Kellstedt, John O Spengler, Margaret Foster, Chanam Lee, Jay E Maddock

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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.

Debra K KellstedtCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, 68198, USA. deb.kellstedt@unmc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3737-8627
John O SpenglerTexas A&M School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
Margaret FosterTexas A&M University Libraries, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
Chanam LeeTexas A&M College of Architecture, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.
Jay E MaddockTexas A&M School of Public Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77843, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bicycling holds promise as a healthy and sustainable means of transportation and physical activity. Despite the growing interest in community-based environmental approaches to promoting physical activity, bikeability has received relatively little attention. This paper provides a scoping review of the instruments developed to measure bikeability along with practice-based analyses of the tools related to user expertise, estimated cost, and required time to implement. The review summarizes the literature, identifies research gaps, and informs stakeholders with articles from EBSCO and transportation databases published after 2003 when the previous bikeability instrument review paper was published. Data extraction included the tool name, data collection method, study location, data collection scale, type of measure, and description. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles included in the full text review, and the inter-rater agreement exceeded 90%. The database search yielded 388 unique articles, and 17 met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Most of the studies, 11 of 17, were applied to settings outside of the U.S. Five studies employed a self-report survey, and five studies examined bikeability using geospatial data, like GIS. Seven studies used a direct observation audit tool-one specifically using a mobile app and another using virtual observation techniques with Google Street View. Bikeability tools are useful for assessing communities and their supports for bicycling. Our primary finding is that advances in technology over the past two decades have driven innovative and useful methodologies, in a variety of disciplines, for assessing the environment, but more consensus is needed to provide a universal definition of bikeability.

Indexed as

Health StatusBicyclingCommunity Health PlanningEnvironment DesignExerciseHealth PromotionHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesTransportationBikeabilityEnvironmental assessment toolsPhysical activityScoping review

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.