• 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

将自行车共享引入低收入社区:明尼阿波利斯市(明尼苏达州)社区参与的经验教训,2011 年。

Bringing bike share to a low-income community: lessons learned through community engagement, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2011.

机构信息

Minneapolis Health Department, 250 S 4th St, Room 510, Minneapolis, MN 55415, USA.

出版信息

Prev Chronic Dis. 2013 Aug 15;10:E138. doi: 10.5888/pcd10.120274.

DOI:10.5888/pcd10.120274
PMID:23948339
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3748276/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

High prevalence of physical inactivity contributes to adverse health outcomes. Active transportation (cycling or walking) is associated with better health outcomes, and bike-sharing programs can help communities increase use of active transportation.

COMMUNITY CONTEXT

The Minneapolis Health Department funded the Nice Ride Minnesota bike share system to expand to the Near North community in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Near North is a diverse, low-income area of the city where residents experience health disparities, including disparities in physical activity levels.

METHODS

The installation of new bike share kiosks in Near North resulted in an environmental change to support physical activity. Community engagement was conducted pre-intervention only and consisted of focus groups, community meetings, and interviews. Postintervention data on bike share trips and subscribers were collected to assess intervention effectiveness.

OUTCOME

Focus group participants offered insights on facilitators and barriers to bike share and suggested system improvements. Community engagement efforts showed that Near North residents were positive about Nice Ride and wanted to use the system; however, the numbers of trips and subscriptions in Near North were low.

INTERPRETATION

Results show that the first season of the expansion was moderately successful in improving outreach efforts and adapting bike share to meet the needs of low-income populations. However, environmental change without adequate, ongoing community engagement may not be sufficient to result in behavior change.

摘要

背景

身体活动不足的高发率导致了不良的健康结果。积极的交通方式(骑自行车或步行)与更好的健康结果相关,而共享单车计划可以帮助社区增加对积极交通方式的使用。

社区背景

明尼苏达州卫生部为明尼阿波利斯的 Nice Ride Minnesota 共享单车系统提供资金,以将其扩展到明尼苏达州明尼阿波利斯的近北区。近北区是该市一个多元化、低收入的地区,居民面临健康差距,包括身体活动水平的差距。

方法

在近北区安装新的共享单车亭,这对支持身体活动的环境发生了改变。社区参与仅在干预前进行,包括焦点小组、社区会议和访谈。收集干预后关于共享单车出行和订户的数据,以评估干预效果。

结果

焦点小组参与者提供了关于共享单车的促进因素和障碍的见解,并提出了系统改进的建议。社区参与工作表明,近北区的居民对 Nice Ride 持积极态度,并希望使用该系统;然而,近北区的出行次数和订阅量较低。

解释

结果表明,扩张的第一个季节在改善外展工作和调整共享单车以满足低收入人群的需求方面取得了一定的成功。然而,没有充分、持续的社区参与的环境变化可能不足以导致行为改变。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/94d5/3748276/046c3283e2ce/PCD-10-E138s02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/94d5/3748276/8744c69f5950/PCD-10-E138s01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/94d5/3748276/046c3283e2ce/PCD-10-E138s02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/94d5/3748276/8744c69f5950/PCD-10-E138s01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/94d5/3748276/046c3283e2ce/PCD-10-E138s02.jpg

相似文献

1
Bringing bike share to a low-income community: lessons learned through community engagement, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 2011.将自行车共享引入低收入社区:明尼阿波利斯市(明尼苏达州)社区参与的经验教训,2011 年。
Prev Chronic Dis. 2013 Aug 15;10:E138. doi: 10.5888/pcd10.120274.
2
Insights in Public Health: Initiating Bicycle Sharing in Hawai'i: Lessons Learned from a Small Pilot Bike Share Program.公共卫生洞察:在夏威夷启动共享单车项目:小型共享单车试点项目的经验教训
Hawaii J Med Public Health. 2015 Oct;74(10):348-51.
3
The Cost-Effectiveness of Bike Share Expansion to Low-Income Communities in New York City.纽约市低收入社区扩大自行车共享的成本效益。
J Urban Health. 2018 Dec;95(6):888-898. doi: 10.1007/s11524-018-0323-x.
4
The Effects of a Citywide Bike Share System on Active Transportation Among College Students: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.全市范围内的自行车共享系统对大学生主动交通的影响:一项随机对照试点研究。
Health Educ Behav. 2020 Jun;47(3):412-418. doi: 10.1177/1090198120914244. Epub 2020 Mar 30.
5
Preparing for bike-sharing: insight from focus groups and surveys, Chattanooga, Tennessee, 2010.为共享单车做准备:来自焦点小组和调查的见解,田纳西州查塔努加,2010年
Health Promot Pract. 2013 Jan;14(1):62-8. doi: 10.1177/1524839912447191. Epub 2012 Jul 5.
6
Socio-Ecological Predictors of Frequent Bike Share Trips: Do Purposes Matter?社会生态因素对共享单车高频使用的预测作用:目的重要吗?
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 20;17(20):7640. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17207640.
7
A Complete Street Intervention for Walking to Transit, Nontransit Walking, and Bicycling: A Quasi-Experimental Demonstration of Increased Use.一项针对步行前往公共交通站点、非前往公共交通站点的步行以及骑自行车的完整街道干预措施:使用量增加的准实验示范。
J Phys Act Health. 2016 Nov;13(11):1210-1219. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2016-0066. Epub 2016 Aug 24.
8
Pedestrian-oriented zoning is associated with reduced income and poverty disparities in adult active travel to work, United States.在美国,以行人为主的分区规划与成年人步行上班时收入和贫困差距的缩小有关。
Prev Med. 2017 Feb;95 Suppl(Suppl):S126-S133. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.10.003. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
9
Pedal Power: Explorers and commuters of New York Citi Bikesharing scheme.《脚踏动力:纽约城市自行车共享计划的探索者和通勤者》
PLoS One. 2020 Jun 3;15(6):e0232957. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232957. eCollection 2020.
10
Cycling for Transportation in Sao Paulo City: Associations with Bike Paths, Train and Subway Stations.圣保罗市的交通骑行:与自行车道、火车站和地铁站的关联。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Mar 21;15(4):562. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15040562.

引用本文的文献

1
Changes in physical activity after joining a bikeshare program: a cohort of new bikeshare users.加入共享单车计划后身体活动的变化:一组新的共享单车使用者的队列研究。
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2022 Oct 4;19(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s12966-022-01353-6.
2
Correlates of bike share use and its association with weight status at an urban university.城市大学校园内共享单车使用情况的相关因素及其与体重状况的关联。
PLoS One. 2022 Aug 3;17(8):e0270870. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270870. eCollection 2022.
3
Barriers and Facilitators to Bikeshare Programs: A Qualitative Study in an Urban Environment.

本文引用的文献

1
Impact evaluation of a public bicycle share program on cycling: a case example of BIXI in Montreal, Quebec.公共自行车共享计划对骑行影响的评估:以魁北克省蒙特利尔的 BIXI 为例。
Am J Public Health. 2013 Mar;103(3):e85-92. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300917. Epub 2013 Jan 17.
2
Summary health statistics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2010.美国成年人健康统计摘要:2010年国家健康访谈调查
Vital Health Stat 10. 2012 Jan(252):1-207.
3
Inequalities in usage of a public bicycle sharing scheme: socio-demographic predictors of uptake and usage of the London (UK) cycle hire scheme.
共享单车项目的障碍与促进因素:城市环境中的定性研究
J Transp Health. 2021 Jun;21. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2021.101062. Epub 2021 Apr 4.
4
Exploring the Health and Spatial Equity Implications of the New York City Bike Share System.探索纽约市共享单车系统对健康和空间公平性的影响。
J Transp Health. 2019 Jun;13:200-209. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2019.04.003. Epub 2019 May 3.
5
The Cost-Effectiveness of Bike Share Expansion to Low-Income Communities in New York City.纽约市低收入社区扩大自行车共享的成本效益。
J Urban Health. 2018 Dec;95(6):888-898. doi: 10.1007/s11524-018-0323-x.
6
Bikeshare Use in Urban Communities: Individual and Neighborhood Factors.共享单车在城市社区中的使用:个人和社区因素。
Ethn Dis. 2017 Nov 9;27(Suppl 1):303-312. doi: 10.18865/ed.27.S1.303. eCollection 2017.
7
Health impact assessments for environmental restoration: the case of Caño Martín Peña.健康影响评估在环境修复中的应用:以马丁·佩尼亚运河为例。
Ann Glob Health. 2014 Jul-Aug;80(4):296-302. doi: 10.1016/j.aogh.2014.07.001. Epub 2014 Nov 25.
公共自行车共享计划使用不平等:伦敦(英国)自行车租赁计划使用和使用的社会人口预测因素。
Prev Med. 2012 Jul;55(1):40-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.05.002. Epub 2012 May 14.
4
Prevalence of obesity and trends in the distribution of body mass index among US adults, 1999-2010.美国成年人肥胖率及体重指数分布的趋势:1999-2010 年。
JAMA. 2012 Feb 1;307(5):491-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.39. Epub 2012 Jan 17.
5
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.
6
The health risks and benefits of cycling in urban environments compared with car use: health impact assessment study.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.
7
Use of a new public bicycle share program in Montreal, Canada.在加拿大蒙特利尔使用新的公共自行车共享计划。
Am J Prev Med. 2011 Jul;41(1):80-3. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.03.002.
8
Obesity and socioeconomic status in adults: United States, 2005-2008.2005 - 2008年美国成年人的肥胖与社会经济地位
NCHS Data Brief. 2010 Dec(50):1-8.
9
Walking and cycling to health: a comparative analysis of city, state, and international data.步行和骑行促进健康:城市、州和国际数据的比较分析。
Am J Public Health. 2010 Oct;100(10):1986-92. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.189324. Epub 2010 Aug 19.
10
Active commuting and cardiovascular disease risk: the CARDIA study.主动通勤与心血管疾病风险:CARDIA研究
Arch Intern Med. 2009 Jul 13;169(13):1216-23. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.163.