• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

哥本哈根增加骑车上下班或上下学对健康的影响评估。

Health Impact Assessment of increased cycling to place of work or education in Copenhagen.

作者信息

Holm Astrid Ledgaard, Glümer Charlotte, Diderichsen Finn

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Section of Social Medicine, University of Copenhagen, CSS, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2012 Jul 24;2(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001135. Print 2012.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001135
PMID:22833650
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4400672/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the effects of increased cycling on both mortality and morbidity.

DESIGN

Health Impact Assessment.

SETTING

Cycling to place of work or education in Copenhagen, Denmark.

POPULATION

Effects were calculated based on the working-age population of Copenhagen.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was change in burden of disease (measured as disability-adjusted life years (DALY)) due to changed exposure to the health determinants physical inactivity, air pollution (particulate matter <2.5 μm) and traffic accidents.

RESULTS

Obtainment of the proposed increase in cycling could reduce the burden of disease in the study population by 19.5 DALY annually. This overall effect comprised a reduction in the burden of disease from health outcomes associated with physical inactivity (76.0 DALY) and an increase in the burden of disease from outcomes associated with air pollution and traffic accidents (5.4 and 51.2 DALY, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates how quantitative Health Impact Assessment can help clarify potential effects of policies: increased cycling involves opposing effects from different outcomes but with the overall health effect being positive. This result illustrates the importance of designing policies that promote the health benefits and minimise the health risks related to cycling.

摘要

目的

量化骑行增加对死亡率和发病率的影响。

设计

健康影响评估。

背景

丹麦哥本哈根骑车上班或上学的情况。

人群

基于哥本哈根工作年龄人口计算影响。

主要结局指标

主要结局指标是由于身体活动不足、空气污染(细颗粒物<2.5μm)和交通事故等健康决定因素暴露变化导致的疾病负担变化(以伤残调整生命年(DALY)衡量)。

结果

实现提议的骑行增加量每年可使研究人群的疾病负担减少19.5个DALY。这一总体效果包括与身体活动不足相关的健康结局导致的疾病负担减少(76.0个DALY),以及与空气污染和交通事故相关的结局导致的疾病负担增加(分别为5.4个和51.2个DALY)。

结论

本研究说明了定量健康影响评估如何有助于阐明政策的潜在影响:骑行增加涉及不同结局的相反影响,但总体健康影响是积极的。这一结果说明了设计既能促进与骑行相关的健康益处又能将健康风险降至最低的政策的重要性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5d1f/4400672/83ec75b30c60/bmjopen-2012-001135fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5d1f/4400672/b32601589ec2/bmjopen-2012-001135fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5d1f/4400672/83ec75b30c60/bmjopen-2012-001135fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5d1f/4400672/b32601589ec2/bmjopen-2012-001135fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5d1f/4400672/83ec75b30c60/bmjopen-2012-001135fig2.jpg

相似文献

1
Health Impact Assessment of increased cycling to place of work or education in Copenhagen.哥本哈根增加骑车上下班或上下学对健康的影响评估。
BMJ Open. 2012 Jul 24;2(4). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001135. Print 2012.
2
Health impact assessment of increasing public transport and cycling use in Barcelona: a morbidity and burden of disease approach.巴塞罗那增加公共交通和自行车使用对健康的影响评估:一种发病率和疾病负担的方法。
Prev Med. 2013 Nov;57(5):573-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2013.07.021. Epub 2013 Aug 9.
3
Assessment of impact of traffic-related air pollution on morbidity and mortality in Copenhagen Municipality and the health gain of reduced exposure.评估交通相关空气污染对哥本哈根市发病率和死亡率的影响,以及减少接触污染带来的健康收益。
Environ Int. 2018 Dec;121(Pt 1):973-980. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.050. Epub 2018 Oct 23.
4
Ambient particulate matter burden of disease in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.沙特阿拉伯王国的环境颗粒物疾病负担。
Environ Res. 2021 Jun;197:111036. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111036. Epub 2021 Mar 26.
5
Health Impacts of Active Transportation in Europe.欧洲主动出行的健康影响。
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 1;11(3):e0149990. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0149990. eCollection 2016.
6
Mortality and Morbidity Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Low-Level PM, BC, NO, and O: An Analysis of European Cohorts in the ELAPSE Project.长期暴露于低水平 PM、BC、NO 和 O 对死亡率和发病率的影响:ELAPSE 项目中欧洲队列的分析。
Res Rep Health Eff Inst. 2021 Sep;2021(208):1-127.
7
Health effects of the London bicycle sharing system: health impact modelling study.伦敦自行车共享系统的健康影响:健康影响建模研究。
BMJ. 2014 Feb 13;348:g425. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g425.
8
The impact of air pollution on deaths, disease burden, and life expectancy across the states of India: the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017.空气污染对印度各邦居民死亡、疾病负担和预期寿命的影响:2017 年全球疾病负担研究。
Lancet Planet Health. 2019 Jan;3(1):e26-e39. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30261-4. Epub 2018 Dec 6.
9
Replacing car trips by increasing bike and public transport in the greater Barcelona metropolitan area: a health impact assessment study.在大巴塞罗那大都市区,通过增加自行车和公共交通出行来替代汽车出行:一项健康影响评估研究。
Environ Int. 2012 Nov 15;49:100-9. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2012.08.009. Epub 2012 Sep 21.
10
Health impacts of air pollution exposure from 1990 to 2019 in 43 European countries.1990 年至 2019 年 43 个欧洲国家空气污染暴露对健康的影响。
Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 18;11(1):22516. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01802-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Bicycle-related cervical spine injuries.与自行车相关的颈椎损伤。
N Am Spine Soc J. 2022 Apr 30;10:100119. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2022.100119. eCollection 2022 Jun.
2
Overall health impacts of a potential increase in cycle commuting in Stockholm, Sweden.瑞典斯德哥尔摩增加骑自行车通勤人数对整体健康的影响。
Scand J Public Health. 2022 Jul;50(5):552-564. doi: 10.1177/14034948211010024. Epub 2021 May 12.
3
Potential for reduced premature mortality by current and increased bicycle commuting: a health impact assessment using registry data on home and work addresses in Stockholm, Sweden.

本文引用的文献

1
Air quality and exercise-related health benefits from reduced car travel in the midwestern United States.美国中西部减少汽车出行对空气质量和与运动相关的健康益处。
Environ Health Perspect. 2012 Jan;120(1):68-76. doi: 10.1289/ehp.1103440. Epub 2011 Nov 2.
2
Benefits of public bicycle schemes must be evaluated carefully.公共自行车计划的益处必须得到审慎评估。
BMJ. 2011 Sep 13;343:d5771; author reply 5774. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5771.
3
The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study.
通过当前及增加自行车通勤来降低过早死亡率的潜力:一项使用瑞典斯德哥尔摩家庭和工作地址登记数据的健康影响评估。
BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2021 Jan 29;7(1):e000980. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000980. eCollection 2021.
4
Sequence analysis of sickness absence and disability pension in the year before and the three years following a bicycle crash; a nationwide longitudinal cohort study of 6353 injured individuals.自行车事故前一年及之后三年的病假和残疾抚恤金的序列分析;对 6353 名受伤个体的全国性纵向队列研究。
BMC Public Health. 2020 Nov 16;20(1):1710. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09788-x.
5
'Cycling On Prescription': a gear change or a wrong turn?“处方骑行”:是换挡还是误入歧途?
Br J Gen Pract. 2020 Oct 29;70(700):547. doi: 10.3399/bjgp20X713237. Print 2020 Nov.
6
What Is the Best Practice Method for Quantifying the Health and Economic Benefits of Active Transport?量化主动交通的健康和经济效益的最佳实践方法是什么?
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Aug 26;17(17):6186. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17176186.
7
Equity impacts of interventions to increase physical activity among older adults: a quantitative health impact assessment.干预措施对增加老年人身体活动的公平影响:定量健康影响评估。
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020 Aug 14;17(1):103. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-00999-4.
8
Quantifying the handprint-Footprint balance into a single score: The example of pharmaceuticals.量化手印-足迹平衡为一个单一的分数:以制药为例。
PLoS One. 2020 Feb 18;15(2):e0229235. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229235. eCollection 2020.
9
Bicycle crashes and sickness absence - a population-based Swedish register study of all individuals of working ages.自行车事故与病假缺勤——一项基于瑞典人群登记数据的所有工作年龄段人群的研究
BMC Public Health. 2019 Jul 15;19(1):943. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7284-1.
10
Evaluating Health Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation in Urban Mobility.评估城市交通减缓气候变化的健康协同效益。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Apr 28;15(5):880. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15050880.
与汽车使用相比,城市环境中骑自行车的健康风险和益处:健康影响评估研究。
BMJ. 2011 Aug 4;343:d4521. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d4521.
4
Moving urban trips from cars to bicycles: impact on health and emissions.将城市出行从汽车转移到自行车:对健康和排放的影响。
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2011 Feb;35(1):54-60. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-6405.2010.00621.x. Epub 2010 Nov 25.
5
"Safety in Numbers" re-examined: can we make valid or practical inferences from available evidence?“人多力量大”再审视:我们能否从现有证据中得出有效或实际的推论?
Accid Anal Prev. 2011 Jan;43(1):235-40. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.08.015. Epub 2010 Sep 9.
6
Do the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks?骑自行车的健康益处是否超过了风险?
Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Aug;118(8):1109-16. doi: 10.1289/ehp.0901747. Epub 2010 Jun 11.
7
Commuters' exposure to particulate matter air pollution is affected by mode of transport, fuel type, and route.通勤者对颗粒物空气污染的暴露受交通方式、燃料类型和路线的影响。
Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Jun;118(6):783-9. doi: 10.1289/ehp.0901622. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
8
Public health benefits of strategies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions: urban land transport.减少温室气体排放策略的公共卫生效益:城市土地运输
Lancet. 2009 Dec 5;374(9705):1930-43. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61714-1. Epub 2009 Nov 26.
9
Categorical versus continuous risk factors and the calculation of potential impact fractions.分类风险因素与连续风险因素,以及潜在影响分数的计算。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010 Mar;64(3):209-12. doi: 10.1136/jech.2009.090274. Epub 2009 Aug 19.
10
The non-linearity of risk and the promotion of environmentally sustainable transport.风险的非线性与环境可持续交通的促进。
Accid Anal Prev. 2009 Jul;41(4):849-55. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2009.04.009. Epub 2009 May 9.