A systematic review of empirical and simulation studies evaluating the health impact of transportation interventions

Abstract

Urban transportation is an important determinant of health and environmental outcomes, and therefore essential to achieving the United Nation's Sustainable Development Goals. To better understand the health impacts of transportation initiatives, we conducted a systematic review of longitudinal health evaluations involving: a) bus rapid transit (BRT); b) bicycle lanes; c) Open Streets programs; and d) aerial trams/cable cars. We also synthesized systems-based simulation studies of the health-related consequences of walking, bicycling, aerial tram, bus and BRT use. Two reviewers screened 3302 unique titles and abstracts identified through a systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, TRID and LILACS databases. We included 39 studies: 29 longitudinal evaluations and 10 simulation studies. Five studies focused on low- and middle-income contexts. Of the 29 evaluation studies, 19 focused on single component bicycle lane interventions; the rest evaluated multi-component interventions involving: bicycle lanes (n = 5), aerial trams (n = 1), and combined bicycle lane/BRT systems (n = 4). Bicycle lanes and BRT systems appeared effective at increasing bicycle and BRT mode share, active transport duration, and number of trips using these modes. Of the 10 simulation studies, there were 9 agent-based models and one system dynamics model. Five studies focused on bus/BRT expansions and incentives, three on interventions for active travel, and the rest investigated combinations of public transport and active travel policies. Synergistic effects were observed when multiple policies were implemented, with several studies showing that sizable interventions are required to significantly shift travel mode choices. Our review indicates that bicycle lanes and BRT systems represent promising initiatives for promoting population health. There is also evidence to suggest that synergistic effects might be achieved through the combined implementation of multiple transportation policies. However, more rigorous evaluation and simulation studies focusing on low- and middle-income countries, aerial trams and Open Streets programs, and a more diverse set of health and health equity outcomes is required.

Air Quality during COVID-19 in Four Megacities: Lessons and Challenges for Public Health

“…This includes more awareness of the central role transport systems have in urban centers. Re-thinking commuting in the deconfinement will also include consideration of rapid transit lanes, aerial trams, and active transports that have been found to reduce commute times and enhance health [ 44 ].…”

A multi-scalar perspective on health and urban housing: an umbrella review

“…Six studies reported on impacts of travel mode on health. Three studies were specifically concerned with cycling interventions, two looked at the potential for general public health impacts (Stewart et al 2015;Stankov et al 2020), and one at physical activity and diet-related health outcomes (Macmillan et al 2018). One study considered public transport and weight-related health outcomes (Patterson et al 2019).…”

“…Impacts on: physical, mental and/or social health and mortality(Browning & Lee 2017;Calogiuri & Chroni 2014;Carmona 2019;Venkataramanan et al 2019;van den Berg et al 2015; de Keijzer et al 2020; Dzhambov & Dimitrova 2018; Felappi et al 2020;Shuvo et al 2020; Gascon et al 2015;Kondo et al 2018a; Lai et al 2019;Rojas-Rueda et al 2019;Parker & de Baro 2019;Rugel & Brauer 2020; Macmillan et al 2018;Audate et al 2019), including for children(Vanaken & Danckaerts 2018; de Keijzer et al 2016;Hartley et al 2020;Islam et al 2020; McCormick 2017), maternal health (Twohig-Bennett & Jones 2018; Lee et al 2020c), elderly people(Yuan et al 2020; Garin et al 2014; Levy-Storms et al 2018;Chastin et al 2015), people with disabilities(Zhang et al 2017;Saitta et al 2019), and health inequalities(Schüle et al Stewart et al 2015); health associated with physical activity, air pollution and injuries(Stankov et al 2020;Patterson et al 2019; Möller et al 2020; Macmillan et al 2018); health of children from disadvantaged socio-economic groups (Ma et al 2020) BMI, type 2 diabetes, mental health and self-reported health(Abeykoon et al 2017; Garin et al 2014; Macmillan et al 2018; Malambo et al. 2016;Iacovou et al 2013) …”

Do State Comprehensive Planning Statutes Address Physical Activity?: Implications for Rural Communities

“…Creating PA-friendly environments has become a priority for reaching global public health, economic development, and sustainability goals [12,[14][15][16]. Researchers have identified many specific built environment features and characteristics associated with increased PA [17][18][19], including bicycling infrastructure [20], mixed-use land development [19,21], increased residential density [19], and access to parks and recreation [19].…”