ArticleHealth economics2025
Walkability and Mental Health Resiliency During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Health economics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Walkability and Mental Health Resiliency During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Health economics · 2025Article
- Longitudinal Analyses of Social Interactions by Neighborhood Walkability, Marital Status, Age, and Differential Effects of a Global Public Health Emergency by Race and Ethnicity.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates if local walkability helped mitigate the well-documented mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Walkability may improve mental health by facilitating walking (which our data suggest occurred during the pandemic), as well as through other avenues such as time spent outdoors and improved social ties. However, estimating the causal effects of walkability is challenged by its lack of exogenous time variation. Our empirical approach uses the pandemic as a geographically-variable and arguably-random shock to mental health which, when combined with Census tract measures of walkability and mental health, sheds light on the possible impact of local walkability on mental health resiliency. Focusing on within-county, over-time variation in mental health and controlling for a wide set of local factors, results suggest that those living in a more walkable community experienced smaller declines in mental health. The magnitudes are reasonable; increasing walkability by one standard deviation is associated with a 4 percent reduction in the average pandemic-related deterioration in mental health. These findings are robust to many sensitivity checks and falsification tests. Although the pandemic is the random shock studied here, this research has implications for the potential role of walkability in diminishing the mental health effects of other stressors.
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.