A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Differences in Behavior, Time, Location, and Built Environment between Objectively Measured Utilitarian and Recreational Walking. | LitMetric

Differences in Behavior, Time, Location, and Built Environment between Objectively Measured Utilitarian and Recreational Walking.

Transp Res D Transp Environ

Seattle Children's Research Institute and Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington Child Health, Behavior and Development, 2001 8 Ave, Seattle, WA 98121, USA,

Published: December 2017

Objectives: Utilitarian and recreational walking both contribute to physical activity. Yet walking for these two purposes may be different behaviors. We sought to provide operational definitions of utilitarian and recreational walking and to objectively measure their behavioral, spatial, and temporal differences in order to inform transportation and public health policies and interventions.

Methods: Data were collected 2008-2009 from 651 Seattle-King County residents, wearing an accelerometer and a GPS unit, and filling-in a travel diary for 7 days. Walking activity bouts were classified as utilitarian or recreational based on whether walking had a destination or not. Differences between the two walking purposes were analyzed, adjusting for the nested structure of walking activity within participants.

Results: Of the 4,905 observed walking bouts, 87.4% were utilitarian and 12.6% recreational walking. Utilitarian walking bouts were 45% shorter in duration (-12.1 min) and 9% faster in speed (+0.3km/h) than recreational walking bouts. Recreational walking occurred more frequently in the home neighborhood and was not associated with recreational land uses. Utilitarian walking occurred in areas having higher residential, employment, and street density, lower residential property value, higher area percentage of mixed-use neighborhood destinations, lower percentage of parks/trails, and lower average topographic slope than recreational walking.

Conclusion: Utilitarian and recreational walking are substantially different in terms of frequency, speed, duration, location, and related built environment. Policies that promote walking should adopt type-specific strategies. The high occurrence of recreational walking near home highlights the importance of the home neighborhood for this activity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6136454PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.09.026DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

recreational walking
32
utilitarian recreational
20
walking
17
walking bouts
12
recreational
11
location built
8
built environment
8
utilitarian
8
walking purposes
8
walking activity
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!