ArticleHealth promotion international2024
A systematic observation of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity levels in Australian natural blue space locations.
Article in Health promotion international, 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.
- Does environmental attention differ during walking, jogging, and cycling in greenways? Evidence from eye movement responses to videos.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research has shown that blue space (i.e. water-based environments) can be good for physical and mental health, with one possible reason being that people are physically active when visiting blue space environments. However, little is known about how active people are when visiting blue space. We used the System for Observing Physical Activity and Recreation in Natural Areas to systematically record whether people were active while visiting eight different blue space locations in Australia. We first calculated the proportion of people who were moderately or vigorously active at each location and then conducted a series of linear regression models to determine which demographic and environmental factors predicted higher activity levels. We identified that 44% of people visiting blue space locations were active. However, there were significant interactions between both age and gender, and type of blue space. Males (β = -0.25, p = 0.018) and females (β = -0.26, p ≤ 0.001) were less active at built-up riverfronts than coastal beaches. Females were also less active at inland beaches (β = -0.15, p = 0.013) and watering holes (β = -0.20, p = 0.011) compared with coastal beaches. Children (β = 0.16, p = 0.006) and adolescents, however, were more active at inland beaches (β = 0.32, p ≤ 0.001) than coastal beaches. These results are important to consider when making decisions around access to, and infrastructure within, blue space environments, as different blue space environments influence human behaviour differently for different people.
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.