↓ Skip to main content

Gender differences in walking (for leisure, transport and in total) across adult life: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
38 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
221 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
Gender differences in walking (for leisure, transport and in total) across adult life: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12889-017-4253-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tessa M. Pollard, Janelle M. Wagnild

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to examine gender differences in walking for leisure, transport and in total in adults living in high-income countries, and to assess whether gender differences in walking practices change across the life-course. A systematic literature search was conducted of publications dated 1995 to 2015. Papers providing quantitative data on participation in walking of both men and women aged at least 18 years in a high-income country were screened for the quality of the data on gender differences in walking. Data were extracted and results were synthesised using forest plots and narrative summary. Thirty-six studies were included in the review: 18 reported on walking for leisure, 16 on walking for transport (in total, or for particular purposes), and 14 on total walking. Most (33) studies provided data comparing the proportion of men and women who walked (at all or for a minimum duration) over a defined period, usually one week. There was consistent evidence that more women than men walk for leisure, although effect sizes were small. However, this effect varies by age: more younger women than younger men walk for leisure, but the gender difference diminishes with age and appears to reverse in the oldest age groups. Taking all ages together, there was no consistent gender difference in walking for transport or in total walking, although the small number of studies reporting on walking to undertake errands suggested that more women than men walk for this purpose. While there is little evidence that levels of total walking consistently vary by gender, our findings suggest that there are consistent gender differences in participation in walking for some purposes, including for leisure, and that there are gender differences in the impact of age on walking. We conclude that more research is needed to improve our understanding of how walking fits into the lives of women and men across the life-course, especially in relation to gender differences in the impact of aging on walking. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015025961 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 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 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 221 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 14%
Student > Master 28 13%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Researcher 26 12%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 66 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 37 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 9%
Engineering 16 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 6%
Arts and Humanities 12 5%
Other 52 24%
Unknown 71 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 03 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,300,495
of 24,329,306 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,437
of 16,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,209
of 314,109 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#29
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,329,306 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 314,109 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.