• 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

康涅狄格州全州范围内基于调查的宜居性指标的制定和验证。

Development and validation of statewide survey-based measures of livability in Connecticut.

机构信息

Department of Community Health and Prevention, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

出版信息

Health Place. 2024 Sep;89:103282. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2024.103282. Epub 2024 Jun 4.

DOI:10.1016/j.healthplace.2024.103282
PMID:38838581
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11544124/
Abstract

Livability, or how a place and its systems (e.g., housing, transportation) supports the ability to lead a livable life, is a determinant of health. There is a lack of standard, validated measures to assess livability in the US. This study employed factor analytic methods to create measures of livability in Connecticut using data from the DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey (DCWS) (n = 32,262). Results identified a 3-factor model (safety, opportunity, and infrastructure) as the best fit, explaining 69% of the variance in survey items. Newly created livability measures had high internal consistency, in addition to high convergent validity with other area-level measures.

摘要

宜居性,或一个地方及其系统(例如住房、交通)如何支持过上宜居生活的能力,是健康的决定因素。美国缺乏评估宜居性的标准、经过验证的衡量标准。本研究利用 DataHaven 社区幸福感调查(DCWS)的数据(n=32262),采用因子分析方法在康涅狄格州创建宜居性衡量标准。结果发现,安全性、机会和基础设施的 3 因素模型是最佳拟合,解释了调查项目中 69%的差异。新创建的宜居性衡量标准具有较高的内部一致性,并且与其他区域层面的衡量标准具有较高的收敛有效性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf49/11544124/e4747696a2b2/nihms-2025610-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf49/11544124/8e66f09ad9b1/nihms-2025610-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf49/11544124/e4747696a2b2/nihms-2025610-f0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf49/11544124/8e66f09ad9b1/nihms-2025610-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/cf49/11544124/e4747696a2b2/nihms-2025610-f0002.jpg

相似文献

1
Development and validation of statewide survey-based measures of livability in Connecticut.康涅狄格州全州范围内基于调查的宜居性指标的制定和验证。
Health Place. 2024 Sep;89:103282. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2024.103282. Epub 2024 Jun 4.
2
Investigating the measurement properties of livability: a scoping review.探究宜居性的测量属性:一项范围综述
Cities Health. 2023;7(5):839-853. doi: 10.1080/23748834.2023.2202894. Epub 2023 May 15.
3
Livable Environments and the Quality of Life of Older People: An Ecological Perspective.适宜环境与老年人的生活质量:生态视角。
Gerontologist. 2019 Jul 16;59(4):675-685. doi: 10.1093/geront/gny043.
4
Can Age-Friendly Planning Promote Equity in Community Health Across the Rural-Urban Divide in the US?老龄化友好型规划能否促进美国农村-城市鸿沟社区健康公平?
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 17;17(4):1275. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041275.
5
Assessing the impact of mega-city construction engineering on urban livability: an explorative study of Yan'an.评估特大城市建设工程对城市宜居性的影响:以延安为例的探索性研究。
Front Public Health. 2024 May 15;12:1358872. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1358872. eCollection 2024.
6
The Development and Validation of the Sexual and Relationship Distress Scale.性与关系困扰量表的编制与验证。
J Sex Med. 2018 Aug;15(8):1167-1179. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.06.004. Epub 2018 Jul 20.
7
Students explore livable communities.学生们探索宜居社区。
Gerontol Geriatr Educ. 2008;29(1):19-37. doi: 10.1080/02701960802074248.
8
Development and validation of PozQoL: a scale to assess quality of life of PLHIV.PozQoL 的制定与验证:用于评估 HIV 感染者生活质量的量表。
BMC Public Health. 2018 Apr 20;18(1):527. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5433-6.
9
A multidimensional tool to measure farm stressors: development and initial validation of the farmer stress assessment tool (FSAT).一种多维工具来衡量农场压力源:农民压力评估工具(FSAT)的开发和初步验证。
BMC Psychol. 2024 Aug 12;12(1):435. doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01929-w.
10
Spatial and temporal characteristics of rural livability and its influencing factors: implications for the development of rural revitalization strategy.农村宜居性的时空特征及其影响因素:对农村振兴战略发展的启示。
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Apr;30(17):49162-49179. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25748-5. Epub 2023 Feb 11.

本文引用的文献

1
"Creating communities that care:" reflections from community leaders on Livability Academy, a neighborhood quality-of-life training program in Philadelphia.“创建关怀社区”:社区领袖对宜居学院的反思,这是费城一项邻里生活质量培训项目。
Cities Health. 2023;7(6):964-972. doi: 10.1080/23748834.2023.2228962. Epub 2023 Jul 10.
2
Investigating the measurement properties of livability: a scoping review.探究宜居性的测量属性:一项范围综述
Cities Health. 2023;7(5):839-853. doi: 10.1080/23748834.2023.2202894. Epub 2023 May 15.
3
Spatial and socioeconomic inequities in liveability in Australia's 21 largest cities: Does city size matter?
澳大利亚21个最大城市宜居性的空间和社会经济不平等:城市规模重要吗?
Health Place. 2022 Nov;78:102899. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2022.102899. Epub 2022 Oct 12.
4
How urban and rural built environments influence the health attitudes and behaviors of people who use drugs.城乡建成环境如何影响吸毒者的健康态度和行为。
Health Place. 2021 May;69:102578. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102578. Epub 2021 May 6.
5
A critical review of liveability approaches and their dimensions.对宜居性方法及其维度的批判性综述。
Geoforum. 2020 Dec;117:90-92. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.09.008. Epub 2020 Oct 2.
6
Partnering on the Social Determinants of Health With the Community Health Improvement Matrix.与社区健康改善矩阵合作,共同应对健康的社会决定因素。
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2021;27(5):459-463. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000001245.
7
Gentrification, Neighborhood Change, and Population Health: a Systematic Review.绅士化、邻里变化与人口健康:系统评价。
J Urban Health. 2020 Feb;97(1):1-25. doi: 10.1007/s11524-019-00400-1.
8
The Urban Liveability Index: developing a policy-relevant urban liveability composite measure and evaluating associations with transport mode choice.城市宜居指数:开发一个与政策相关的城市宜居综合指标,并评估其与交通方式选择的关系。
Int J Health Geogr. 2019 Jun 11;18(1):14. doi: 10.1186/s12942-019-0178-8.
9
Liveable for whom? Prospects of urban liveability to address health inequities.宜居为了谁?解决健康不平等问题的城市宜居性前景。
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Jul;232:94-105. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.05.001. Epub 2019 May 2.
10
Environmental Justice: the Economics of Race, Place, and Pollution.环境正义:种族、地域与污染经济学
J Econ Perspect. 2019;33(1):185-208.