ArticleHeliyon2024
Urban park green space use analysis based on trajectory big data: Experience from a medium-sized city in China.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regular visits to park green space offer remarkable benefits for the physical and mental health of urban residents. Achieving a comprehensive understanding of the utilization across the entire city is a prerequisite for improving the overall utilization rate of park green spaces. Traditional social survey methods are limited by their sample size and time-consuming nature, while methods based on geographic location big data are gaining momentum. This study focuses on Xuchang, a medium-sized city in China, and systematically analyzes the current state and influencing factors of park green space utilization by mining GPS trajectory big data from April 3 to 12, 2022. Results indicate that residents' choices of park green spaces are highly diverse. Approximately 20% of visitors on holidays and weekends, and about 25% of visitors on weekdays, prefer the park green space closest to their homes. Notably, the distance threshold for park green space visits on weekdays, weekends, and holidays is 3633, 3824, and 4127 m, respectively. These distances are significantly higher than the several hundred meters specified in planning documents or commonly used in accessibility analyses. For individuals who frequently visit park green spaces, distance is the most critical influencing factor. Conversely, for those who occasionally visit, distance is not the primary consideration. For individuals who rarely or never visit park green spaces, personal attitudes play an essential role. In comparison to weekdays, the number of visitors on holidays and weekends is larger, the travel distance is longer, and they are more inclined to choose larger parks. Visits are concentrated in the afternoon and evening, and weather changes remarkably affect park green space utilization. Importantly, no compensatory effect is observed between the frequency and duration of park green space visits. These findings hold important implications for urban planning, management, and the promotion of park green space utilization.
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.