Table 10
Summary results of evidence on the relationship environmental factors and transportation cycling
Environm. variables Positive association Negative association No association A* B* C* D*
Walkability 59, 83, 85, 86 82, 82 5 4/6 67 ++
Residential density 53M,1, 53F,1 53M,2, 53M,3, 53F,2, 53F,3 1 N/A N/A N/A
Land use mix diversity 80 1 N/A N/A N/A
Street connectivity 85 1 N/A N/A N/A
Access to shops/services/work 35, 35, 35, 38, 53M,1, 53F,1, 53F,2, 53F,3, 64, 77, 77, 91, 91, 90 53M,2, 53M,3, 77, 77, 85 7 14/19 74 ++
Access to public transport 50 35, 53M,1, 53M,2, 53M,3, 53F,1, 53F,2, 53F,3 3 1/8 13 0
Access to recreation facilities 85, 91 52 52, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92, 92 5 2/14 14 0
Walking/cycling facilities 64, 64, 64, 80, 90, 91 35, 35, 64, 64, 64, 80, 85, 85 6 6/14 43 (++)
Safety 80, 85 2 N/A N/A N/A
Traffic-related safety 41M, 41F, 64, 90, 91 792, 91, 91 35, 35, 35, 35, 64, 791, 80, 85 8 5/16 31 00
Crime-related safety 792, 85, 90 91 35, 35, 791, 90, 91 5 3/9 33 0
Aesthetics 791 91 792, 80 3 1/4 25 0
Urbanization 35, 64, 84, 90, 90, 91, 91, 91 84 5 8/9 89 ++
Hilliness 80 64, 91 3 2/3 67 (−)
Quality of environment 77M, 77M, 77F, 77F 1 N/A N/A N/A

* A = n° of independent studies; B = n° of associated records divided by all records; C = % of evidence; D = summary code.

Regular vs italics font = subjective vs objective PA measures; regular vs bold font = subjective vs objective environmental measures.

M = specific results for males; F = specific results for females; 1 = specific results for 1st subgroup; 2 = specific results for 2nd subgroup; 3 = specific results for 3rd subgroup.

Van Holle et al. BMC Public Health 2012 12:807   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-807

Open Data