| Title |
Policies to Promote Active Travel: Evidence from Reviews of the Literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Environmental Health Reports, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40572-017-0148-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Meghan Winters, Ralph Buehler, Thomas Götschi |
| Abstract |
While many levels of government recognize that walking and cycling (active travel) are critical to healthy cities, a continued challenge is to identify and prioritize strategies that will increase walking and cycling for transportation. We review evidence on policies that can increase active travel. The reviews included here conclude that policies related to active travel may operate at various levels of the socio-ecological framework, including society, cities, routes or individuals. The provision of convenient, safe and connected walking and cycling infrastructure is at the core of promoting active travel, but policies may work best when implemented in comprehensive packages. There is strong evidence that active travel can result in substantial health benefits. However, there remains considerable uncertainty about the exact effects of specific policies on walking or cycling rates or safety. Further research is needed to quantify the impact of specific policies or packages of policies, especially across different settings or for different population segments. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 45% |
| Czechia | 1 | 9% |
| Italy | 1 | 9% |
| Denmark | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 64% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 256 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 256 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 47 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 18% |
| Researcher | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 35 | 14% |
| Unknown | 65 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 39 | 15% |
| Engineering | 26 | 10% |
| Psychology | 21 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 18 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 63 | 25% |
| Unknown | 77 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,611,279
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#75
of 356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,568
of 328,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.