Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCradock, Angie L.
dc.contributor.authorBarrett, Jessica L.
dc.contributor.authorChriqui, Jamie F.
dc.contributor.authorEvenson, Kelly R.
dc.contributor.authorGoins, Karin V.
dc.contributor.authorGustat, Jeanette
dc.contributor.authorHeinrich, Katie M.
dc.contributor.authorPerry, Cynthia K.
dc.contributor.authorScanze, Michele
dc.contributor.authorSchmid, Thomas L.
dc.contributor.authorTabak, Rachel G.
dc.contributor.authorUmstattd Meyer, M. Renee
dc.contributor.authorValko, Cheryl
dc.date2022-08-11T08:10:19.000
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-23T17:04:31Z
dc.date.available2022-08-23T17:04:31Z
dc.date.issued2018-03-01
dc.date.submitted2018-09-05
dc.identifier.citation<p>Am J Health Promot. 2018 Mar;32(3):657-666. doi: 10.1177/0890117117738758. Epub 2017 Nov 6. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117117738758">Link to article on publisher's site</a></p>
dc.identifier.issn0890-1171 (Linking)
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0890117117738758
dc.identifier.pmid29108441
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14038/44653
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: To assess predictors of stated support for policies promoting physically active transportation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SETTING: US counties selected on county-level physical activity and obesity health status. PARTICIPANTS: Participants completing random-digit dialed telephone survey (n = 906). MEASURES: Survey measures assessed stated support for 5 policies to promote physically active transportation, access to active transportation facilities, and time spent in a car. County-level estimates included household car dependence and funding for bicycle-pedestrian projects. ANALYSIS: Multivariable generalized linear mixed models using binary distribution and logit link, accounting for clustering within county. RESULTS: Respondents supported policies for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians through street improvements (89%), school active transportation programs (75%), employer-funded active commuting incentives (67%), and allocation of public funding (68%) and tax support (56%) for building and maintaining public transit. Residents spending > 2 h/d (vs < 0.7 hours) in cars were more likely to support street (odds ratio [OR]: 1.87; confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-3.22) and public transit (OR: 1.85; CI: 1.24-2.77) improvements. Residents in counties investing > $1.6 million in bicycle and pedestrian improvements expressed greater support for funding (OR: 1.71; CI: 1.04-2.83) and tax increases (OR: 1.73; CI: 1.08-2.75) for transit improvements compared to those with lower prior investments ( < $276 100). CONCLUSION: Support for policies to enable active transportation is higher where relevant investments in active transportation infrastructure are large ( > $1.6 M), public transit is nearby, and respondents drive > 2 h/d.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.relation<p><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=29108441&dopt=Abstract">Link to Article in PubMed</a></p>
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0890117117738758
dc.subjectactive tranpsort
dc.subjectactive transportation
dc.subjectcar use
dc.subjectdriving
dc.subjectphysical activity
dc.subjectpolicy
dc.subjectpublic transit
dc.subjectBehavioral Medicine
dc.subjectBehavior and Behavior Mechanisms
dc.subjectCommunity Health and Preventive Medicine
dc.subjectHealth Policy
dc.subjectHealth Psychology
dc.subjectPreventive Medicine
dc.subjectPublic Health Education and Promotion
dc.subjectTransportation
dc.titleDriven to Support: Individual- and County-Level Factors Associated With Public Support for Active Transportation Policies
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.source.journaltitleAmerican journal of health promotion : AJHP
dc.source.volume32
dc.source.issue3
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://escholarship.umassmed.edu/prc_pubs/94
dc.identifier.contextkey12790163
html.description.abstract<p>PURPOSE: To assess predictors of stated support for policies promoting physically active transportation.</p> <p>DESIGN: Cross-sectional.</p> <p>SETTING: US counties selected on county-level physical activity and obesity health status.</p> <p>PARTICIPANTS: Participants completing random-digit dialed telephone survey (n = 906).</p> <p>MEASURES: Survey measures assessed stated support for 5 policies to promote physically active transportation, access to active transportation facilities, and time spent in a car. County-level estimates included household car dependence and funding for bicycle-pedestrian projects.</p> <p>ANALYSIS: Multivariable generalized linear mixed models using binary distribution and logit link, accounting for clustering within county.</p> <p>RESULTS: Respondents supported policies for accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians through street improvements (89%), school active transportation programs (75%), employer-funded active commuting incentives (67%), and allocation of public funding (68%) and tax support (56%) for building and maintaining public transit. Residents spending > 2 h/d (vs < 0.7 hours) in cars were more likely to support street (odds ratio [OR]: 1.87; confidence interval [CI]: 1.09-3.22) and public transit (OR: 1.85; CI: 1.24-2.77) improvements. Residents in counties investing > $1.6 million in bicycle and pedestrian improvements expressed greater support for funding (OR: 1.71; CI: 1.04-2.83) and tax increases (OR: 1.73; CI: 1.08-2.75) for transit improvements compared to those with lower prior investments ( < $276 100).</p> <p>CONCLUSION: Support for policies to enable active transportation is higher where relevant investments in active transportation infrastructure are large ( > $1.6 M), public transit is nearby, and respondents drive > 2 h/d.</p>
dc.identifier.submissionpathprc_pubs/94
dc.contributor.departmentPrevention Research Center
dc.contributor.departmentDivision of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine
dc.source.pages657-666


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record