↓ Skip to main content

Development and reliability of a streetscape observation instrument for international use: MAPS-global

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
Development and reliability of a streetscape observation instrument for international use: MAPS-global
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12966-018-0650-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelli L. Cain, Carrie M. Geremia, Terry L. Conway, Lawrence D. Frank, James E. Chapman, Eric H. Fox, Anna Timperio, Jenny Veitch, Delfien Van Dyck, Hannah Verhoeven, Rodrigo Reis, Alexandre Augusto, Ester Cerin, Robin R. Mellecker, Ana Queralt, Javier Molina-García, James F. Sallis

Abstract

Relationships between several built environment factors and physical activity and walking behavior are well established, but internationally-comparable built environment measures are lacking. The Microscale Audit of Pedestrian Streetscapes (MAPS)-Global is an observational measure of detailed streetscape features relevant to physical activity that was developed for international use. This study examined the inter-observer reliability of the instrument in five countries. MAPS-Global was developed by compiling concepts and items from eight environmental measures relevant to walking and bicycling. Inter-rater reliability data were collected in neighborhoods selected to vary on geographic information system (GIS)-derived macro-level walkability in five countries (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Hong Kong-China, and Spain). MAPS-Global assessments (n = 325) were completed in person along a ≥ 0.25 mile route from a residence toward a non-residential destination, and a commercial block was also rated for each residence (n = 82). Two raters in each country rated each route independently. A tiered scoring system was created that summarized items at multiple levels of aggregation, and positive and negative valence scores were created based on the expected effect on physical activity. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was computed for scales and selected items using one-way random models. Overall, 86.6% of individual items and single item indicators showed excellent agreement (ICC ≥ 0.75), and 13.4% showed good agreement (ICC = 0.60-0.74). All subscales and overall summary scores showed excellent agreement. Six of 123 items were too rare to compute the ICC. The median ICC for items and scales was 0.92 with a range of 0.50-1.0. Aesthetics and social characteristics showed lower ICCs than other sub-scales, but reliabilities were still in the excellent range (ICC ≥ 0.75). Evaluation of inter-observer reliability of MAPS-Global across five countries indicated all items and scales had "good" or "excellent" reliability. The results demonstrate that trained observers from multiple countries were able to reliably conduct observations of both residential and commercial areas with the new MAPS-Global instrument. Next steps are to evaluate construct validity in relation to physical activity in multiple countries and gain experience with using MAPS-Global for research and practice applications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 172 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 12%
Student > Master 21 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 41 24%
Unknown 50 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 20 12%
Sports and Recreations 19 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 8%
Arts and Humanities 8 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 67 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 21 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,853,492
of 23,394,907 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#710
of 1,962 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,074
of 331,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#18
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,394,907 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,962 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 331,082 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.