Is neighbourhood walkability related to body mass index among different age groups? A cross-sectional study of Canadian urban areas.
epidemiology
preventive medicine
public health
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 11 2019
28 11 2019
Historique:
entrez:
1
12
2019
pubmed:
1
12
2019
medline:
3
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Studies of neighbourhood walkability and body mass index (BMI) have shown mixed results, possibly due to biases from self-reported outcomes or differential effects across age groups. Our objective was to examine relationships between walkability and objectively measured BMI in various age groups, in a nationally representative population. The study population came from the 2007-2011 Canadian Health Measures Survey, a cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative Canadian population. In our covariate-adjusted analyses, we included survey respondents aged 6-79 who were not pregnant, did not live in rural areas, were not missing data and were not thin/underweight. We used objectively measured height and weight to calculate BMI among adults aged 18-79 and zBMI among children aged 6-17. We categorised respondents into walkability quintiles based on their residential Street Smart Walk Score values. We performed linear regression to estimate differences between walkability quintiles in BMI and zBMI. We analysed adults and children overall; age subgroups 6-11, 12-17, 18-29, 30-44, 45-64 and 65-79; and sex subgroups. The covariate-adjusted models included 9265 respondents overall. After adjustment, differences between walkability quintiles in BMI and zBMI were small and not statistically significant, except for males aged 6-17 in the second-highest walkability quintile who had significantly lower zBMIs than those in the lowest quintile. After accounting for confounding factors, we did not find evidence of a relationship between walkability and BMI in children or adults overall, or in any age subgroup with sexes combined. However, post hoc analysis by sex suggested males aged 6-17 in more walkable areas may have lower zBMIs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Studies of neighbourhood walkability and body mass index (BMI) have shown mixed results, possibly due to biases from self-reported outcomes or differential effects across age groups. Our objective was to examine relationships between walkability and objectively measured BMI in various age groups, in a nationally representative population.
METHODS
The study population came from the 2007-2011 Canadian Health Measures Survey, a cross-sectional survey of a nationally representative Canadian population. In our covariate-adjusted analyses, we included survey respondents aged 6-79 who were not pregnant, did not live in rural areas, were not missing data and were not thin/underweight. We used objectively measured height and weight to calculate BMI among adults aged 18-79 and zBMI among children aged 6-17. We categorised respondents into walkability quintiles based on their residential Street Smart Walk Score values. We performed linear regression to estimate differences between walkability quintiles in BMI and zBMI. We analysed adults and children overall; age subgroups 6-11, 12-17, 18-29, 30-44, 45-64 and 65-79; and sex subgroups.
RESULTS
The covariate-adjusted models included 9265 respondents overall. After adjustment, differences between walkability quintiles in BMI and zBMI were small and not statistically significant, except for males aged 6-17 in the second-highest walkability quintile who had significantly lower zBMIs than those in the lowest quintile.
CONCLUSION
After accounting for confounding factors, we did not find evidence of a relationship between walkability and BMI in children or adults overall, or in any age subgroup with sexes combined. However, post hoc analysis by sex suggested males aged 6-17 in more walkable areas may have lower zBMIs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31784443
pii: bmjopen-2019-032475
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032475
pmc: PMC6924813
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e032475Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
JAMA. 2005 Apr 20;293(15):1861-7
pubmed: 15840860
Environ Health Perspect. 2009 Mar;117(3):442-7
pubmed: 19337520
JAMA. 2016 May 24-31;315(20):2211-20
pubmed: 27218630
Epidemiology. 2017 Nov;28(6):780-788
pubmed: 28767514
Health Rep. 2015 Jul;26(7):3-10
pubmed: 26177041
Obes Rev. 2015 May;16(5):362-75
pubmed: 25753170
Lancet. 2016 Apr 2;387(10026):1377-1396
pubmed: 27115820
JAMA. 2018 Jun 19;319(23):2419-2429
pubmed: 29922829
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 14;9(1):e85295
pubmed: 24454837
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2018 Apr 3;15(1):33
pubmed: 29615131
J Transp Health. 2016 Dec;3(4):426-439
pubmed: 28163997
Am J Prev Med. 2016 Nov;51(5):722-730
pubmed: 27211897
Am J Public Health. 2016 May;106(5):934-40
pubmed: 26985612
Int J Obes (Lond). 2006 Apr;30(4):677-83
pubmed: 16276358
Prev Med. 2018 Feb;107:69-74
pubmed: 29126915
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 6;377(1):13-27
pubmed: 28604169
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1997 Oct;21(10):941-7
pubmed: 9347414
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Mar;79(3):379-84
pubmed: 14985210
CMAJ Open. 2016 Dec 01;4(4):E720-E728
pubmed: 28018887
Am J Prev Med. 2010 Nov;39(5):460-3
pubmed: 20965384
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Nov;8(11):4160-79
pubmed: 22163200
Environ Health Perspect. 2016 Jun;124(6):754-60
pubmed: 26550779
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018 Dec;6(12):944-953
pubmed: 30389323
Popul Health Metr. 2013 Jul 10;11:7
pubmed: 23842197
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2008 Nov;93(11 Suppl 1):S1-8
pubmed: 18987267
Diabetes Care. 2007 Mar;30(3):744-52
pubmed: 17327354
Health Place. 2010 Mar;16(2):389-98
pubmed: 20022286
BMC Public Health. 2014 Mar 06;14:233
pubmed: 24602291
Int J Obes (Lond). 2006 Jan;30(1):164-70
pubmed: 16231026
Circulation. 2012 Feb 7;125(5):729-37
pubmed: 22311885