Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36932349›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2023

Walkability and urban built environments-a systematic review of health impact assessments (HIA).

Joachim Westenhöfer, Elham Nouri, Merle Linn Reschke, Fabian Seebach, Johanna Buchcik

Full text readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Impact of social determinants on the development, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer: recommended public health interventions.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Joachim WestenhöferCompetence Center Health and Department Health Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033, Hamburg, Germany. joachim.westenhoefer@haw-hamburg.de.
Elham NouriCompetence Center Health and Department Health Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033, Hamburg, Germany.
Merle Linn ReschkeCompetence Center Health and Department Health Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033, Hamburg, Germany.
Fabian SeebachCompetence Center Health and Department Health Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033, Hamburg, Germany.
Johanna BuchcikCompetence Center Health and Department Health Sciences, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Ulmenliet 20, 21033, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrban environments are important determinants of human health. The term walkability summarizes features of the urban built environment that promote walking and other types of physical activity. While the beneficial effects of active and public transport have been well established, the health impact of other features of walkability are less well documented.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of health impact assessments (HIAs) of walkability. Studies were identified through PUBMED and Science Direct, from two German websites related to urban health and reference tracking. Finally, 40 studies were included in the present review. We applied qualitative thematic analysis to summarize the major results from these studies.

resultsMost of the HIAs (n = 31) reported the improvement of health or health behaviour resulting from an investigated project or policy. However, three HIAs reported a lack of improvement or even a decrease of health status. In parallel, 13 HIAs reported a gain in economic value, whereas one reported a lack or loss of economic effects. Moreover, three HIAs reported on social effects and six HIAs gave additional recommendations for policies or the implementation of projects or HIAs.

conclusionsMost HIAs investigate the impact of increasing active or public transport. Other features of walkability are less well studied. With few exceptions, HIAs document beneficial impacts of improving walkability on a variety of health outcomes, including reductions of mortality and non-communicable diseases.

Indexed as

Health Impact AssessmentUrban HealthBuilt EnvironmentExerciseHumansResidence CharacteristicsWalkingBuilt environmentHealth impact assessmentWalkability

Identifiers

PMID36932349
PMCPMC10024446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read41
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.