SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

McCormack GR, Graham TM, Christian H, Toohey AM, Rock MJ. Can. J. Public Health 2016; 107(3): e245-e250.

Affiliation

Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary; O'Brien Institute for Public Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. gmccorma@ucalgary.ca.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2016, Canadian Public Health Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

27763838

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Our study objectives were to: 1) estimate differences in perceptions of the neighbourhood built environment among non-dog-owners, owners who walk their dogs (dog-walkers) and owners who do not walk their dogs (non-dog-walkers), and 2) estimate associations between perceptions of the neighbourhood built environment and dog-walking frequency.

METHOD: A random cross-section of Calgary adults completed telephone interviews during August-October 2007 (n = 2,199, response rate = 33.6%) or January-April 2008 (n = 2,223, response rate = 36.7%). Telephone interviews and a follow-up questionnaire captured physical activity, health and sociodemographic characteristics, dog-ownership, and perceived built environment characteristics. Using ANOVA, we compared the perceived built environment among non-dog-owners, non-dog-walkers and dog-walkers. For dog-owners only, logistic regression estimated associations (odds ratios: OR) between dog-walking participation and perceived built environment. Among dog-walkers, logistic regression estimated associations between dog-walking ≥4 times/week and perceived built environment. Furthermore, among dog-walkers, linear regression estimated associations (unstandardized β) between dog-walking frequency and perceived built environment.

RESULTS: Compared with dog-walkers, non-dog-owners reported more positive perceptions of neighbourhood street connectivity, pedestrian infrastructure, and walkability (p < 0.05). Among dog-walkers, aesthetics was positively associated (p < 0.05) with the likelihood of walking the dog ≥4 times in a usual week (covariate-adjusted-OR = 1.67) and dog-walking frequency (covariate-adjusted-β = 0.15). Among dog-walkers, walkability was also positively associated (p < 0.05) with dog-walking ≥4 times in a usual week (covariate-adjusted-OR = 1.03) and dog-walking frequency (covariate-adjusted-β = 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Perceptions of the neighbourhood built environment appear to differ between non-dog-owners and dog-owners. While built environment improvements may not encourage owners to initiate dog-walking, creating attractive and walkable neighbourhoods may support regular dog-walking among owners already walking their dogs.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print