Reliability and validity of two instruments designed to assess the walking and bicycling suitability of sidewalks and roads

American Journal of Health Promotion

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 38-46

  Emery, James ^a   Crump, Carolyn ^a   Bors, Philip ^a  

^a IL   (United States)

Author keywords

Active Living; Active Transportation; Bicycling; Community Design; Pedestrian; Physical Activity; Prevention Research; Walking

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CYCLING; ENVIRONMENT; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT; MEASUREMENT; METHODOLOGY; PUBLIC HEALTH; RELIABILITY; VALIDATION PROCESS; WALKING;

EID: 0141792147     PISSN: 08901171     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4278/0890-1171-18.1.38     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. US Department of Health and Human Services. Physical Activity and Health - A Report of the Surgeon General Executive Summary. Atlanta, Ga: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 1996.
2. US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Public Health Service, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Activity DoNaP. Promoting Physical Activity - A Guide for Community Action. Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics; 1999.
3. King AC. Community and public health approaches to the promotion of physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26:1405-1412.
4. Schmid TL, Pratt M, Howze E. Policy as intervention: environmental and policy approaches to the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Am J Public Health. 1995;85:1207-1211.
5. Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Recommendations to increase physical activity in communities. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(4S):67-72.
6. US Department of Transportation. The National Bicycling And Walking Study - Transportation Choices for a Changing America: Final Report. Washington, DC: US Dept of Transportation; 1994. FHWA-PD-94-023.
7. Humpel N, Owen N, Leslie E. Environmental factors associated with adults' participation in physical activity: A review. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22(3):188-199.
8. King AC, Stokols D, Talen E, Brassington GS, Killingsworth R. Theoretical approaches to the promotion of physical activity: forging a transdisciplinary paradigm. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(2S):15-25.
9. Handy SL, Boarnet MG, Ewing R, Killingsworth R. How the built environment affects physical activity: views from urban planning. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(2S):64-73.
10. Berrigan D, Troiano RP. The association between urban form and physical activity in US adults. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(2S):74-79.
11. Cervero R. Built environments and mode choice: toward a normative framework. Transport Res Part D. 2002;7:265-284.
12. Ewing R, Cervero R. Travel and the built environment: a synthesis. Transport Res Rec. 2001;1780:87-114.
13. Greenwald MJ, Boarnet MG. The Built Environment as a Determinant of Walking Behavior: Analyzing Non-work Pedestrian Travel in Portland, Oregon. Irvine, Calif: University of California, Irvine; 2001.
14. Turner SM, Shafer CS, Stewart WP. Bicycle Suitability criteria: Literature Review and State-of-the-Practice Survey. Austin, Tex: Texas Department of Transportation; 1997. TX-97/3988-1
15. Frank LD, Engelke P, Hourigan D. How Land Use and Trannsportation Systems Impact Public Health: An Annotated Bibliography. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2001.
16. Craig CL, Brownson RC, Cragg SE, Dunn AL. Exploring the effect of the environment on physical activity: a study examining walking to work. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(2S):36-43.
17. Brownson RC, Baker EA, Housemann RA, Brennan LK, Bacak SJ. Environmental and policy determinants of physical activity in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1995-2003.
18. Shriver K. Influence of environmental design on pedestrian travel behavior in four Austin neighborhoods. Transport Res Rec. 1996;1578:64-75.
19. New South Wales Health and Centre for Population Health MAHS. Footpaths, Walkways, and Cyclepaths Checklist. Dubbo, New South Wales: New South Wales Health and Centre for Population Health, Macguire Area Health Service; September 1997.
20. Main Roads. Safety Audit Checklist for Dual-Use Paths. East Perth, Western Australia; Main Roads Western Australia; 1997.
21. Pein WE. Trail Intersection Design Guidelines. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center; 1996.
22. Guttenplan M, Landis BW, Crider L, McLeod DS. Multi-modal Level of Service (LOS) Analysis at a Planning Level. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board; 2001. TRB Paper 01-3084.
23. Landis BW. Bicycle level of service (BLOS) evaluation methodology. Sprinkle Consulting, Inc. Available at: www.fhiplan.com/md_bike_ped_plan/pdfdocs/bicyclelos.pdf. Accessed September 20, 2002.
24. Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Ottenberg RM, McLeod DS, Guttenplan M. Modeling the Roadside Walking Environment: A Pedestrian Level of Service. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board; 2001. TRB Paper 01-0511.
25. Landis BW, Vattikuti VR, Brannick MT. Real-time human perceptions: Toward a bicycle level of service. Transport Res Rec. 1997:119-126.
26. Bonk D, Luxenberg S. Bicycle Suitability Index. Chapel Hill, NC: Chapel Hill Planning Department; 1999.
27. Harkey DL, Reinfurt DW, Sorton A. Development of the Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service Concept-Implementation Manual. McLean, Va: Federal Highway Administration; 1998. FHWA-RD-98-095.
28. Crump C, Benson EB, Stutts JC. Assessing Community Policies and Environmental Support for Physical Activity: Pilot Test of Methods. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention; 1998.
29. Turner SM, Shafer CS, Stewart WP. Bicycle Suitability Criteria For State Roadways in Texas. Austin, Tex: Texas Department of Transportation; 1997. TX 97/3988-S.
30. Eddy N. Developing a level of service for bicycle use. Paper presented at: ProBike ProWalk '96; September 3-6, 1996; Portland, Me.
31. Dixon LB. Bicycle and pedestrian level-of-service performance measures and standards for congestion management systems. Transport Res Rec 1538. 1996:1-9.
32. McCalip S, Tedder L. Orange County Bicycle Suitability Study. Orange County, Calif: Orange County Department of Planning; October 1995.
33. Landis BW. Bicycle interaction hazard score: A theoretical model. Transport Res Rec 1438. 1994:3-8.
34. Epperson B. Evaluating suitability of roadways for bicycle use: Toward a cycling level-of-service standard. Transport Res Rec 1438. 1994:9-16.
35. Sorton A, Walsh T. Bicycle stress level as a tool to evaluate urban and suburban bicycle compatibility. Transport Res Rec 1438. 1994:17-24.
36. Pikora TJ, Bull FC, Jamrozik K, Knuiman M, Giles-Corti B, Donovan RJ. Developing a reliable audit instrument to measure the physical environment for physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(3):187-194.
37. King AC, Bauman A, Abrams DB. Forging transdisciplinary bridges to meet the physical inactivity challenge in the 21st century. Am J Prev Med. 2002;23(2S):104-106.
38. Burden D, Wallwork M, Sides K, Trias R, Rue HB. Street Design Guidelines for Healthy Neighborhoods. Sacramento, Calif: Center for Livable Communities; January 1999.
39. Local Government Commission Center for Livable Communities. Why People Don't Walk and What City Planners Can Do About it. Sacramento, Calif.
40. Local Government Commission Center for Livable Communities. New Thinking for a New Transportation Age. Sacramento, Calif: Local Government Commission Center for Livable Communities; 2001.
41. Burden D. Ten steps to create a walkable community. Paper presented at: Triad Walkable Communities Regional Conference; October 27-28, 1999; Winston-Salem, NC.
42. Burden D. Walkable Communities: A Search For Quality. 1997.
43. Pedestrian Federation of America. Walk Trail: A Citizen's Guide to Walkable Communities. Washington, DC: Pedestrian Federation of America; 1995.
44. Sallis JF, Owen N. Physical Activity and Behavioral Medicine. Vol 3. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage; 1999.
45. Sallis JF, Bauman A, Pratt M. Environmental and policy interventions to promote physical activity. Am J Prev Med. 1998;15(4):379-397.
46. Troped PJ, Saunders RP, Pate RR, Reininger B, Ureda JR, Thompson SJ. Associations between self-reported and objective physical environmental factors and use of a community rail-trail. Prev Med. 2001;32:191-200.
47. Stokols D. Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion. Am J Health Prom. 1996;10:282-297.
48. Fawcett SB, Sterling TD, Paine-Andrews A, et al. Evaluating Community Efforts to Prevent Cardiovascular Diseases. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; 1995.
49. Emery JE, Crump CE, Bors P. Improving opportunities for walking and bicycling in communities. Paper presented at: ProBike ProWalk 2000; September 7, 2000; Philadelphia, Pa.
50. Singleton RA, Straits BC, Straits MM. Approaches to Social Research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1993.