Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36685662›Full record

ArticleCities & health2022

Beyond Proximity and Towards Equity: A Multidimensional View of Urban Greenspace Access.

Daniel J Hindman, Jessie Chien, Craig E Pollack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cities & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Daniel J HindmanDivisions of General Internal Medicine and Pediatric Hospitalist Medicine, Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
Jessie ChienJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Craig E PollackDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.

Funding

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH IN HEART &VASCULAR DISEASET32HL007180 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MARUTHUR, NISA M · 1985 to 2020
$11.4M
NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007180
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Park access is primarily conceived of as a question of proximity. We sought to develop a multidimensional tool based on a broad theory of green space access to better understand objective and subjective factors that capture varying dimensions of urban green space access that may be associated with its use. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study in two communities bordering a large park in Baltimore City, Maryland. We randomly selected households for an in-person survey conducted between April to September 2019. Our primary outcome was self-reported number of park visits over the last 30 days. The main independent variables conceptualized park access based on Penchansky and Thomas' theory of access. Results: Based on 87 respondents, living within a 10-minute walk was not associated with park use. Park use was associated with the perception that there were park events that individuals could participate in (adjusted IRR 6.83 [95% CI 2.57, 18.2]) and feeling safe in the park during the day (adjusted IRR 6.26 [95% CI 2.18, 18.0]). Those who reported that living near the park was affordable reported fewer park visits (adjusted IRR 0.53 [95% CI 0.32, 0.86]). Conclusions: Physical proximity was not significantly associated with green space use, but perceptions of safety, programming, and neighborhood affordability were. Our findings highlight the importance of subjective factors as part of a broader theory of park access.

Indexed as

green spaceHealth equityPark accessPhysical activityrecreation and parksurban health

Identifiers

PMID36685662
PMCPMC9854398

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.