Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141117›Full record

ReviewPreventive medicine reports2022

Systematic review on quantifying pedestrian injury when evaluating changes to the built environment.

Keshia M Pollack Porter, John D Omura, Rachel M Ballard, Erin L Peterson, Susan A Carlson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Keshia M Pollack PorterDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Center for Injury Research and Policy, Johns Hopkins Institute for Health and Social Policy, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.
John D OmuraDivision of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Rachel M BallardOffice of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, National Institutes for Health, Bethesda, MD, United States.
Erin L PetersonDivision of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Susan A CarlsonDivision of Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Obesity, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modifying the built environment to make communities more walkable remains one strategy to promote physical activity. These modifications may have the added benefit of reducing the risk of pedestrian injury; however, there is a gap in the physical activity literature regarding how best to measure pedestrian injury. Examining the measures that have been used and related data sources can help inform the use of pedestrian injury data to evaluate whether safety is optimized as walking increases. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies that evaluated changes to the built environment that support walking and measures impacts on pedestrian injury as a measure of safety. We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science to identify peer-review studies and websites of fifteen organizations to document studies from the grey literature published in English between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2018. Our search identified twelve studies that met the inclusion criteria. The few studies that measured changes in pedestrian injury used crash data from police reports. Injury frequency was often reported, but not injury severity, and no studies reported injury risk based on walking exposure. We conclude that few studies have measured pedestrian injury in the context of creating more walkable communities. Future research would benefit from using well-characterized measures from existing studies to support consistency in measurement, and from more longitudinal and evaluation research to strengthen the evidence on additional benefits of walkability. Increased collaborations with injury prevention professionals could bolster use of valid and reliable measures.

Indexed as

Accident preventionAccidentsReviewsSafetyTrafficWounds and injuries/ prevention & control

Identifiers

PMID35141117
PMCPMC8814639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.