ArticleBMC public health2022
What do adults want in parks? A qualitative study using walk-along interviews.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- Walkable Intelligent Parks: Can a Large Language Model Turn Urban Park Audit Findings into Actionable Recommendations?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Drive with me: Utilizing car-based mobile interviews to investigate place and health.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2026Article
- Article
- Research on the impact of the urban park built environment on physical activity.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Examining park features that encourage physical activity and social interaction among adults.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- How perceived environmental quality influences physical activity in urban green spaces? A moderated mediation model.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Older adults' demands for sports parks: a Kano model study based on sports parks in Shandong Province of China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Level of elderly-supportive infrastructure, fine particulate matter and cardiovascular disease hospitalisations: a time-stratified case-crossover study in Wuhan.Global health action · 2024Article
- The role of the perceived environment for recreational walking among adults in socioeconomically disadvantaged situations: A study using walk-along interviews.SSM - population health · 2023Article
- Natural environments, psychosocial health, and health behaviors in a crisis - A scoping review of the literature in the COVID-19 context.Journal of environmental psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundParks provide opportunities for physical activity and social interaction and are critical for enhancing public health. It is therefore important to better understand the needs and preferences of park features among adults to help park designers to create parks that optimise use. This qualitative study provided an in-depth examination of factors and characteristics that influence visitation, park-based physical activity, and social interaction among adults (19-64 years). We also explored perceptions of parks and park use and impacts of COVID on park usage and needs.
methodsParticipants (n = 27, 40.4 years [+ 11.9], 70% female) were interviewed from 2017 to 2020 while walking through one of eight diverse parks located in varying socioeconomic areas of metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Participants were prompted to discuss their experiences, opinions and preferences regarding park features. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using NVivo 12 software.
resultsPark features and characteristics highly valued for visitation related to aesthetics and atmosphere, including trees, gardens, spaciousness, and water features. Features most valued for physical activity included walking and bike tracks, basketball rings, nice aesthetics, and sports walls. Features most valued for social interaction included seating and tables, and picnic/barbecue areas.
conclusionsThis study highlights features and characteristics that may be important to prioritise, to encourage active and social park visits among adults. This evidence will help policy and decision makers, urban planners, landscape architects, and local, state, and national government organisations to create parks that support adults to lead healthy and active lives. Future research should examine the relative importance of the features identified in this study to inform future park design/redesign.
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.