↓ Skip to main content

Co-benefits of designing communities for active living: an exploration of literature

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2015
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
63 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
289 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
Co-benefits of designing communities for active living: an exploration of literature
Published in
International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12966-015-0188-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

James F Sallis, Chad Spoon, Nick Cavill, Jessa K Engelberg, Klaus Gebel, Mike Parker, Christina M Thornton, Debbie Lou, Amanda L Wilson, Carmen L Cutter, Ding

Abstract

To reverse the global epidemic of physical inactivity that is responsible for more than 5 million deaths per year, many groups recommend creating "activity-friendly environments." Such environments may have other benefits, beyond facilitating physical activity, but these potential co-benefits have not been well described. The purpose of the present paper is to explore a wide range of literature and conduct an initial summary of evidence on co-benefits of activity-friendly environments. An extensive but non-systematic review of scientific and "gray" literature was conducted. Five physical activity settings were defined: parks/open space/trails, urban design, transportation, schools, and workplaces/buildings. Several evidence-based activity-friendly features were identified for each setting. Six potential outcomes/co-benefits were searched: physical health, mental health, social benefits, safety/injury prevention, environmental sustainability, and economics. A total of 418 higher-quality findings were summarized. The overall summary indicated 22 of 30 setting by outcome combinations showed "strong" evidence of co-benefits. Each setting had strong evidence of at least three co-benefits, with only one occurrence of a net negative effect. All settings showed the potential to contribute to environmental sustainability and economic benefits. Specific environmental features with the strongest evidence of multiple co-benefits were park proximity, mixed land use, trees/greenery, accessibility and street connectivity, building design, and workplace physical activity policies/programs. The exploration revealed substantial evidence that designing community environments that make physical activity attractive and convenient is likely to produce additional important benefits. The extent of the evidence justifies systematic reviews and additional research to fill gaps.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 289 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
France 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 284 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 56 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 18%
Researcher 51 18%
Student > Bachelor 35 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 37 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 58 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 15%
Sports and Recreations 32 11%
Environmental Science 18 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 6%
Other 65 22%
Unknown 58 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 December 2019.
All research outputs
#608,858
of 18,382,898 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#229
of 1,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,416
of 224,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,382,898 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,711 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 224,231 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them