Objective
Physical inactivity is a major public health concern. Though active transportation through bicycling and walking can increase physical activity and thereby positively affect health, factors that influence people's decisions to commute using active transportation modes remain underexplored and often fail to capture equity-related barriers. Increases in active transportation during the COVID-19 pandemic call for a better understanding of these influences. This study examines the commute mode choices of essential workers in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA to explore the extent to which active transportation to work is explained by individual, social, and environmental factors and whether active transportation choices reflect inequalities.
Methods
Drawing on the theory of planned behavior and the social-ecological model, this study utilizes data from an online survey (N = 213) completed between June and August 2020. Bivariate analyses compare respondents who commuted using active transportation modes to those who did not using chi-square and ANOVA tests. A series of logistic regression models using forward stepwise selection, controlling for demographic characteristics and commute distance, identify salient individual, social, and environmental factors associated with active transportation.
Results
Nearly half of respondents changed their commute mode during the pandemic, most often to limit exposure to COVID-19. The full model, accounting for 54% of variation in active transportation commuting, indicated significantly lower odds of active transportation use among non-white (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.155) respondents and those who reported time constraints (OR: 0.450), concerns about safety from traffic (OR: 0.482), and greater satisfaction with community support for bicycling and pedestrian issues (OR: 0.551) and significantly higher odds among those who reported safety concerns around germs (OR: 1.580).
Conclusions
Structural and social investments that make bicycling and walking safer commuting alternatives during COVID-19 could protect essential works and contribute to sustained behavior change. Community engagement is essential for implementation efforts.
Despite the scale of veteran homelessness and government-community initiatives to end homelessness among veterans, few studies have featured individual veteran accounts of experiencing homelessness. Here we track veterans' trajectories from military service to homelessness through qualitative, semistructured interviews with 17 post-9/11-era veterans. Our objective was to examine how veterans become homeless-including the role of military and postmilitary experiences-and how they negotiate and attempt to resolve episodes of homelessness. We identify and report results in 5 key thematic areas: transitioning from military service to civilian life, relationships and employment, mental and behavioral health, lifetime poverty and adverse events, and use of veteran-specific services. We found that veterans predominantly see their homelessness as rooted in nonmilitary, situational factors such as unemployment and the breakup of relationships, despite very tangible ties between homelessness and combat sequelae that manifest themselves in clinical diagnoses such as posttraumatic stress disorder. Furthermore, although assistance provided by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and community-based organizations offer a powerful means for getting veterans rehoused, veterans also recount numerous difficulties in accessing and obtaining VA services and assistance. Based on this, we offer specific recommendations for more systematic and efficient measures to help engage veterans with VA services that can prevent or attenuate their homelessness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.