Identify an efficient method of creating a comprehensive and concise measure of the built environment integrating data from geographic information systems (GIS) and the Senior Walking Environmental Assessment Tool (SWEAT).
Design.
Cross-sectional study using a population sample.
Setting.
Eight municipally defined neighborhoods in Portland, Oregon.
We described built environmental features using SWEAT audits and GIS data. We obtained information on walking behaviors and potential confounders through in-person interviews.
Analysis.
We created two sets of environmental measures, one based on the conceptual framework used to develop SWEAT and another using principal component analysis (PCA). Each measure's association with walking for transportation and exercise was then assessed and compared using logistic regression.
Results.
A priori measures (destinations, safety, aesthetics, and functionality) and PCA measures (accessibility, comfort/safety, maintenance, and pleasantness) were analogous in conceptual meaning and had similar associations with walking. Walking for transportation was associated with destination accessibility and functional elements, whereas walking for exercise was associated with maintenance of the walking area and protection from traffic. However, only PCA measures consistently reached statistical significance.
Conclusion.
The measures created with PCA were more parsimonious than those created a priori. Performing PCA is an efficient method of combining and scoring SWEAT and GIS data.
FrankLDEngelkePO. The built environment and human activity patterns: exploring the impacts of urban form on public health. J Plann Lit. 2001;16:202–218.
2.
LeeCVernez-MoudonA. Physical activity and environment research in the health field: implications for urban and transportation planning practice and research. J Plann Lit. 2004;19:147–181.
3.
PattersonPKChapmanNJ. Urban form and older residents’ service use, walking, driving, quality of life, and neighborhood satisfaction. Am J Health Promot. 2004;19:45–52.
4.
BrownsonRCChangJJEylerAA. Measuring the environment for friendliness toward physical activity: a comparison of the reliability of 3 questionnaires. Am J Public Health. 2004;94:473–483.
5.
HumpelNOwenNIversonD. Perceived environment attributes, residential location, and walking for particular purposes. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:119–125.
6.
SaelensBSallisJFBlackJBChenD. Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. Am J Public Health. 2003;93:1552–1558.
7.
DrewnowskiARehmCDSoletD. Disparities in obesity rates: analysis by ZIP code area. Soc Sci Med. 2007;65:2458–2463.
8.
FrankLDSchmidTLSallisJFChapmanJ. Linking objectively measured physical activity with objectively measured urban form: findings from SMARTRAQ. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28:117–125.
9.
KingWCBelleSHBranchJS. Objective measures of neighborhood environment and physical activity in older women. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28:461–469.
10.
NelsonMCGordon-LarsonPSongYPopkinBM. Built and social environments: associations with adolescent overweight and activity. Am J Prev Med. 2006;31:109–117.
11.
CoultonCJKorbinJChanTSuM. Mapping residents’ perceptions of neighborhood boundaries: a methodological note. Am J Community Psychol. 2001;29:371–383.
12.
CunninghamGOMichaelYLFarquharSALapidusJ. Developing a reliable senior walking environmental assessment tool. Am J Prev Med. 2005;29:215–217.
13.
DayKBoarnetMGAlfonzoMForsythA. The Irvine-Minnesota Inventory to measure built environments: development. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30:144–152.
14.
PikoraTGiles-CortiBBullF. Developing a framework for assessment of the environmental determinants of walking and cycling. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:1693–1703.
15.
HoehnerCBrennanRamirez LKElliottMB. Perceived and objective environmental measures and physical activity among urban adults. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28(2Suppl 2):105–116.
16.
JagoRBaranowskiTZakeriIHarrisM. Observed environmental features and the physical activity of adolescent males. Am J Prev Med. 2005;29:98–104.
17.
RuttCDColemanKJ. Examining the relationships among built environment, physical activity, and body mass index in El Paso, TX. Prev Med. 2005;40:831–841.
18.
PikoraTJGiles-CortiBKnuimanMW. Neighborhood environmental factors correlated with walking near home: using SPACES. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006;38:708–714.
19.
HatcherL. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using SAS for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1994.
20.
OwenNCerinELeslieE. Neighborhood walkability and the walking behavior of Australian adults. Am J Prev Med. 2007;33:387–395.
21.
SuminskiRRCarlosPoston WSPetosaRL. Features of the neighborhood environment and walking by U.S. adults. Am J Prev Med. 2005;28:149–155.
22.
NagelCLCarlsonNEBosworthMMichaelYL. The relation between neighborhood built environment and walking activity among older adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168:461–468.
23.
GauvinLRivaMBarnettT. Association between neighborhood active living potential and walking. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;167:944–953.
24.
McCormackGRGiles-CortiBBulsaraM. The relationship between destination proximity, destination mix and physical activity behaviors. Prev Med. 2008;46:33–40.
25.
HumpelNOwenNIversonD. Perceived environment attributes, residential location, and walking for particular purposes. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:119–125.
26.
LovasiGSMoudonAVPearsonAL. Using built environment characteristics to predict walking for exercise. Int J Health Geographics. 2008;7:10.
27.
BoerRZhengYOvertonA. Neighborhood design and walking trips in ten U.S. metropolitan areas. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32:298–304.
28.
LiFFisherKJBrownsonRCBosworthM. Multilevel modelling of built environment characteristics related to neighbourhood walking activity in older adults. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59:558–564.
29.
OliverLNSchuurmanNHallAW. Comparing circular and network buffers to examine the influence of land use on walking for leisure and errands. Int J Health Geographics. 2007;6:41.
30.
SuminskiRRHeinrichKMPostonWS. Characteristics of urban sidewalks/streets and objectively measured physical activity. J Urban Health. 2008;85:178–190.
31.
van LentheFJBrugJMackenbachJP. Neighbourhood inequalities in physical inactivity: the role of neighbourhood attractiveness, proximity to local facilities and safety in The Netherlands. Soc Sci Med. 2004;60:763–775.
32.
CoulthardMWalkerAMorganA. People's Perceptions of Their Neighborhood and Community Involvement: Results From the Social Capital Module of the General Household Survey 2000. London, United Kingdom: The Stationery Office; 2002.
33.
Giles-CortiBTimperioACuttH. Development of a reliable measure of walking within and outside the local neighborhood: RESIDE's Neighborhood Physical Activity Questionnaire. Prev Med. 2006;42:455–459.
34.
FisherKJLiFMichaelYClevelandM. Neighborhood-level influences on physical activity among older adults: a multilevel analysis. J Aging Phys Act. 2004;12:45–63.
35.
SimpsonMESerdulaMGaluskaDA. Walking trends among US adults: the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance system. Am J Prev Med. 2003;25:95–100.
