Development of the rural active living assessment tools: Measuring rural environments

Yousefian, Anush; Hennessy, Erin; Umstattd, M. Renée; Economos, Christina D.; Hallam, Jeffrey S.; Hyatt, Raymond R.; Hartley, David

doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.08.018

Cited by 71 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In rural and remote regions, dispersed built environment features, low population density, and limited transportation options are key factors in the accessibility of physical activity opportunities. As such, rural built environments also impact and are impacted by programming and policies [12,23].…”

Section: The Active Living Built Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In urban settings, active living initiatives have focused on improvements to the built environment, such as sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle lanes, to help residents build physical activity into daily life [45][46][47]. In larger rural communities with an established grid-like downtown district and access to public transportation, improvements to the built environment for active living may look similar to those targeted in urban settings [23]. In a national sample of 1000 families, rural respondents ranked sidewalks as the Bmost important^of eight transportation-related facilities for livability, above major roads, long-distance transportation, and parking [48], while data from a 2009 household travel survey revealed that rural Americans walked and biked at rates lower than the overall national rate.…”

Section: Transportation and Walkabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recreational areas, such as town recreation centers, playgrounds, parks, bike paths, playing fields, trails, and other facilities can expand options for rural residents to be active, and should be accessible, well-marked, adequately maintained, clear of snow, and with adequate shade [12,23,32,68]. Cold, wet, and snowy environments as well as intense heat and early darkness limit use of outdoor fields, pools, and other recreation areas in rural communities and highlight the need for indoor facilities to address seasonal barriers [32,55,69,75,77].…”

Section: Recreational Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Built Environments and Active Living in Rural and Remote Areas: a Review of the Literature

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rural children and adults are more likely to have obesity than their urban counterparts even after adjustment for individual-level behaviors, suggesting that rural environments may promote obesity. The rural built environment may be an important area of research that can help us understand rural-urban disparities in obesity. The purpose of this review is to summarize the rural built environment and active living literature, and to address key issues, gaps, and observations in the field. A literature review was conducted in spring 2015 to identify research published from 2000 to 2015. Our review suggests that limited active living built environments in rural communities and unique rural barriers to physical activity may contribute to a higher prevalence of obesity compared to urban populations. More empirical research is needed to build the evidence-base for the association between rural built environments, active living, and obesity. School- and community-based policies that expand active living opportunities in rural areas should also be closely examined.

show abstract

Section: The Active Living Built Environmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Transportation and Walkabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recreational Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Built Environments and Active Living in Rural and Remote Areas: a Review of the Literature

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7,[9][10][11][12] Even recent efforts to focus on rural areas emphasize town centers rather than neighborhoods per se. 13 Additionally, many measures of neighborhood walkability require an explicit definition of neighborhood, particularly with respect to neighborhood boundaries (eg, zip codes or 1-mile buffers). 6,9,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Yet, few studies have investigated if researcher-imposed definitions of neighborhood are congruent with those of residents in varying types of communities such as rural areas.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13 Additionally, many measures of neighborhood walkability require an explicit definition of neighborhood, particularly with respect to neighborhood boundaries (eg, zip codes or 1-mile buffers). 6,9,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Yet, few studies have investigated if researcher-imposed definitions of neighborhood are congruent with those of residents in varying types of communities such as rural areas. 15,18 The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of neighborhood walkability in rural areas.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural Neighborhood Walkability: Implications for Assessment

Kegler¹,

Alcantara²,

Haardörfer³

et al. 2015

Journal of Physical Activity and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Physical activity levels, including walking, are lower in the southern U.S., particularly in rural areas. This study investigated the concept of rural neighborhood walkability to aid in developing tools for assessing walkability and to identify intervention targets in rural communities.Methods:Semi-structured interviews were conducted with physically active adults (n = 29) in rural Georgia. Mean age of participants was 55.9 years; 66% were male, 76% were white, and 24% were African American. Participants drew maps of their neighborhoods and discussed the relevance of typical domains of walkability to their decisions to exercise. Comparative analyses were conducted to identify major themes.Results:The majority felt the concept of neighborhood was applicable and viewed their neighborhood as small geographically (less than 0.5 square miles). Sidewalks were not viewed as essential for neighborhood-based physical activity and typical destinations for walking were largely absent. Destinations within walking distance included neighbors’ homes and bodies of water. Views were mixed on whether shade, safety, dogs, and aesthetics affected decisions to exercise in their neighborhoods.Conclusions:Measures of neighborhood walkability in rural areas should acknowledge the small size of self-defined neighborhoods, that walking in rural areas is likely for leisure time exercise, and that some domains may not be relevant.

show abstract

Piloting a citizen science approach to auditing rural walkability in Tasmania

Jose,

Rowbotham,

Laird

et al. 2024

Health Prom J of Aust

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPeople living in ‘walkable’ areas are more active, but common approaches to assessing walkability using audit tools and geospatial data have limitations in rural areas. This project explored the feasibility, acceptability and benefits of using a citizen science approach to audit walkability in rural communities.MethodsUsing a citizen science approach, community members in rural towns completed audit tools and photographs to capture walkability. Researchers collated data and facilitated workshops with community members to identify priorities for action. The feasibility of applying a citizen science approach was evaluated through surveys and interviews with citizen scientists and project team members.ResultsThree rural Australian towns (population 300; 850; 2890) were included, with a total of 10 community members (1–6 per town) completing audits and 13 (4–9 per town) attending workshops. It was feasible for citizen scientists to complete audits to identify environmental and physical attributes and impediments to walking. It was less feasible for citizen scientists to audit local policies and programs. Workshops enabled a broader and deeper understanding of the data, and represent a crucial aspect of the citizen science process. Citizen scientists were motivated by a desire to improve their community. Lack of diversity among citizen scientists, safety and recruitment were limitations.Conclusion/DiscussionCitizen science was a feasible and acceptable approach for auditing rural walkability, generating a rich and deep understanding of how the built environment impacts walking. Citizen science allows researchers, policy makers and community members to work together to generate data and establish priorities.So What?Citizen science has the potential to support the involvement of members of the public in research and decision‐making in health promotion. Researchers need to adopt strategies to ensure diversity among citizen scientists as well as consider the support needs of citizen scientists when adopting this approach.

show abstract

Development of the rural active living assessment tools: Measuring rural environments

Cited by 71 publications

References 27 publications

Built Environments and Active Living in Rural and Remote Areas: a Review of the Literature

Built Environments and Active Living in Rural and Remote Areas: a Review of the Literature

Rural Neighborhood Walkability: Implications for Assessment

Piloting a citizen science approach to auditing rural walkability in Tasmania

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About