↓ Skip to main content

The neighbourhood physical environment and active travel in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
68 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
395 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
536 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The neighbourhood physical environment and active travel in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12966-017-0471-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ester Cerin, Andrea Nathan, Jelle van Cauwenberg, David W. Barnett, Anthony Barnett, on behalf of the Council on Environment and Physical Activity (CEPA) – Older Adults working group

Abstract

Perceived and objectively-assessed aspects of the neighbourhood physical environment have been postulated to be key contributors to regular engagement in active travel (AT) in older adults. We systematically reviewed the literature on neighbourhood physical environmental correlates of AT in older adults and applied a novel meta-analytic approach to statistically quantify the strength of evidence for environment-AT associations. Forty two quantitative studies that estimated associations of aspects of the neighbourhood built environment with AT in older adults (aged ≥ 65 years) and met selection criteria were reviewed and meta-analysed. Findings were analysed according to five AT outcomes (total walking for transport, within-neighbourhood walking for transport, combined walking and cycling for transport, cycling for transport, and all AT outcomes combined) and seven categories of the neighbourhood physical environment (residential density/urbanisation, walkability, street connectivity, access to/availability of services/destinations, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, aesthetics and cleanliness/order, and safety and traffic). Most studies examined correlates of total walking for transport. A sufficient amount of evidence of positive associations with total walking for transport was found for residential density/urbanisation, walkability, street connectivity, overall access to destinations/services, land use mix, pedestrian-friendly features and access to several types of destinations. Littering/vandalism/decay was negatively related to total walking for transport. Limited evidence was available on correlates of cycling and combined walking and cycling for transport, while sufficient evidence emerged for a positive association of within-neighbourhood walking with pedestrian-friendly features and availability of benches/sitting facilities. Correlates of all AT combined mirrored those of walking for transport. Positive associations were also observed with food outlets, business/institutional/industrial destinations, availability of street lights, easy access to building entrance and human and motorised traffic volume. Several but inconsistent individual- and environmental-level moderators of associations were identified. Results support strong links between the neighbourhood physical environment and older adults' AT. Future research should focus on the identification of types and mixes of destinations that support AT in older adults and how these interact with individual characteristics and other environmental factors. Future research should also aim to clarify dose-response relationships through multi-country investigations and data-pooling from diverse geographical regions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 68 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 536 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 536 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 91 17%
Student > Master 79 15%
Researcher 71 13%
Student > Bachelor 39 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 5%
Other 67 13%
Unknown 160 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 70 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 48 9%
Engineering 40 7%
Sports and Recreations 35 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 6%
Other 113 21%
Unknown 197 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2022.
All research outputs
#694,585
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#204
of 2,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,201
of 424,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#5
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,116 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 424,744 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.