Suppr超能文献

标题:改变物理环境能否促进步行和骑行?有效措施及其作用机制的系统综述。

Title: Can changing the physical environment promote walking and cycling? A systematic review of what works and how.

机构信息

MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Centre for Diet & Activity Research (CEDAR), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

European Centre for Environment & Human Health, Medical School, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.

出版信息

Health Place. 2019 Jul;58:102161. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2019.102161. Epub 2019 Jul 10.

Abstract

Environmental changes aimed at encouraging walking or cycling may promote activity and improve health, but evidence suggests small or inconsistent effects in practice. Understanding how an intervention works might help explain the effects observed and provide guidance about generalisability. We therefore aimed to review the literature on the effects of this type of intervention and to understand how and why these may or may not be effective. We searched eight electronic databases for existing systematic reviews and mined these for evaluative studies of physical environmental changes and assessed changes in walking, cycling or physical activity. We then searched for related sources including quantitative or qualitative studies, policy documents or reports. We extracted information on the evidence for effects ('estimation'), contexts and mechanisms ('explanation') and assessed credibility, and synthesised material narratively. We identified 13 evaluations of interventions specifically targeting walking and cycling and used 46 related sources. 70% (n = 9 evaluations) scored 3 or less on the credibility criteria for effectiveness. 6 reported significant positive effects, but higher quality evaluations were more likely to report positive effects. Only two studies provided rich evidence of mechanisms. We identified three common resources that interventions provide to promote walking and cycling: (i) improving accessibility and connectivity; (ii) improving traffic and personal safety; and (iii) improving the experience of walking and cycling. The most effective interventions appeared to target accessibility and safety in both supportive and unsupportive contexts. Although the evidence base was relatively limited, we were able to understand the role of context in the success of interventions. Researchers and policy makers should consider the context and mechanisms which might operate before evaluating and implementing interventions.

摘要

环境变化旨在鼓励步行或骑自行车,可能会促进活动并改善健康,但证据表明,实际效果较小或不一致。了解干预措施的作用可能有助于解释观察到的效果,并为推广提供指导。因此,我们旨在审查关于此类干预措施效果的文献,并了解这些干预措施为何有效或无效,以及如何有效或无效。我们在八个电子数据库中搜索了现有的系统评价,并对这些评价进行了挖掘,以评估物理环境变化的评估研究,并评估步行、骑自行车或身体活动的变化。然后,我们搜索了相关来源,包括定量或定性研究、政策文件或报告。我们提取了有关效果证据(“估计”)、背景和机制(“解释”)的信息,并评估了可信度,并以叙述的方式综合了材料。我们确定了 13 项专门针对步行和骑自行车的干预措施评估,并使用了 46 项相关来源。70%(n=9 项评估)在有效性可信度标准上得分为 3 或以下。6 项报告了显著的积极影响,但高质量的评估更有可能报告积极影响。只有两项研究提供了丰富的机制证据。我们确定了干预措施促进步行和骑自行车的三种常见资源:(i)提高可达性和连接性;(ii)提高交通和个人安全性;(iii)改善步行和骑自行车的体验。最有效的干预措施似乎针对支持和不支持的环境中的可达性和安全性。尽管证据基础相对有限,但我们能够理解背景在干预成功中的作用。研究人员和政策制定者在评估和实施干预措施之前,应考虑可能起作用的背景和机制。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6770/6737987/317c8eb529b0/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验