Objectively measuring the association between the built environment and physical activity: a systematic review and reporting framework

Abstract

Background Objective measures of built environment and physical activity provide the opportunity to directly compare their relationship across different populations and spatial contexts. This systematic review synthesises the current body of knowledge and knowledge gaps around the impact of objectively measured built environment metrics on physical activity levels in adults (≥ 18 years). Additionally, this review aims to address the need for improved quality of methodological reporting to evaluate studies and improve inter-study comparability though the creation of a reporting framework. Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. After abstract and full-text screening, 94 studies were included in the final review. Results were synthesised using an association matrix to show overall association between built environment and physical activity variables. Finally, the new PERFORM (’Physical and Environmental Reporting Framework for Objectively Recorded Measures’) checklist was created and applied to the included studies rating them on their reporting quality across four key areas: study design and characteristics, built environment exposures, physical activity metrics, and the association between built environment and physical activity. Results Studies came from 21 countries and ranged from two days to six years in duration. Accelerometers and using geographic information system (GIS) to define the spatial extent of exposure around a pre-defined geocoded location were the most popular tools to capture physical activity and built environment respectively. Ethnicity and socio-economic status of participants were generally poorly reported. Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was the most common metric of physical activity used followed by walking. Commonly investigated elements of the built environment included walkability, access to parks and green space. Areas where there was a strong body of evidence for a positive or negative association between the built environment and physical activity were identified. The new PERFORM checklist was devised and poorly reported areas identified, included poor reporting of built environment data sources and poor justification of method choice. Conclusions This systematic review highlights key gaps in studies objectively measuring the built environment and physical activity both in terms of the breadth and quality of reporting. Broadening the variety measures of the built environment and physical activity across different demographic groups and spatial areas will grow the body and quality of evidence around built environment effect on activity behaviour. Whilst following the PERFORM reporting guidance will ensure the high quality, reproducibility, and comparability of future research.

Indicators of community physical activity resources and opportunities and variation by community sociodemographic characteristics: A scoping review

“…Resources are community assets that may be used for physical activity or to provide physical activity opportunities (e.g., parks, recreation facilities) ( Emery and Flora, 2006 , Flora et al, 2016 ). Research has shown greater availability of resources, such as playgrounds, positively influences adult and youth physical activity outcomes ( Davison and Lawson, 2006 , Ding et al, 2011 , Pontin et al, 2022 ). For example, Pate and colleagues ( Pate et al., 2021 ) operationalized the concept of a “physical activity desert” and found that children living near parks had greater physical activity than children without parks near their homes.…”

Examining activity-friendly neighborhoods in the Norwegian context: green space and walkability in relation to physical activity and the moderating role of perceived safety

“…While many studies have found positive associations (see e.g., Sallis et al [ 24 ], Sallis et al [ 31 ], and Astell-Burt et al [ 32 ]), there are studies that do not identify any such relationships [ 33 ], and some have even found negative associations between access to green space and physical activity levels in adults [ 34 ]. Thus, more evidence is needed on how these relationships vary by context and population groups [ 18 ], and we have rather limited knowledge on the role of green space and walkability for physical activity among adults within the Nordic region [ 35 – 38 ]. In recently published reviews on the topic [ 36 – 38 ], only five studies from the Nordic context have been identified, of which two studies were conducted in Finland [ 39 , 40 ], two in Sweden [ 41 , 42 ] and one in Norway [ 43 ].…”

“…Thus, more evidence is needed on how these relationships vary by context and population groups [ 18 ], and we have rather limited knowledge on the role of green space and walkability for physical activity among adults within the Nordic region [ 35 – 38 ]. In recently published reviews on the topic [ 36 – 38 ], only five studies from the Nordic context have been identified, of which two studies were conducted in Finland [ 39 , 40 ], two in Sweden [ 41 , 42 ] and one in Norway [ 43 ]. Anyhow, the Norwegian study examined if new bicycle infrastructure resulted in changes of route among bicyclists and did not assess green space characteristics and walkability [ 43 ].…”

Methodology for Creating a Geographic Information System for Transport Infrastructure Facilities

“…Additionally, the study notes challenges related to updating data to maintain constantly up-to-date information. Pontin et al (2022) and Wang and Yang (2019) have identified links between the urban environment and the physical activity of different population groups. A geographic information system was used to obtain characteristics of the impact of the chosen location as the most convenient tool for collecting and processing relevant data.…”