↓ Skip to main content

Organisational travel plans for improving health

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
330 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Organisational travel plans for improving health
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005575.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hosking J, Macmillan A, Connor J, Bullen C, Ameratunga S, Hosking, Jamie, Macmillan, Alexandra, Connor, Jennie, Bullen, Chris, Ameratunga, Shanthi, Jamie Hosking, Alexandra Macmillan, Jennie Connor, Chris Bullen, Shanthi Ameratunga

Abstract

Dependence on car use has a number of broad health implications, including contributing to physical inactivity, road traffic injury, air pollution and social severance, as well as entrenching lifestyles that require environmentally unsustainable energy use. Travel plans are interventions that aim to reduce single-occupant car use and increase the use of alternatives such as walking, cycling and public transport, with a variety of behavioural and structural components. This review focuses on organisational travel plans for schools, tertiary institutes and workplaces. These plans are closely aligned in their aims and intervention design, having emerged from a shared theoretical base. To assess the effects of organisational travel plans on health, either directly measured, or through changes in travel mode. We searched the following electronic databases; Transport (1988 to June 2008), MEDLINE (1950 to June 2008), EMBASE (1947 to June 2008), CINAHL (1982 to June 2008), ERIC (1966 to June 2008), PSYCINFO (1806 to June 2008), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to June 2008), BUILD (1989 to 2002), Social Sciences Citation Index (1900 to June 2008), Science Citation Index (1900 to June 2008), Arts & Humanities Index (1975 to June 2008), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to August 2008), CENTRAL (to August 2008), Cochrane Injuries Group Register (to December 2009), C2-RIPE (to July 2008), C2-SPECTR (to July 2008), ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (1861 to June 2008). We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and Internet sources. We did not restrict the search by date, language or publication status. We included randomised controlled trials and controlled before-after studies of travel behaviour change programmes conducted in an organisational setting, where the measured outcome was change in travel mode or health. Both positive and negative health effects were included. Two authors independently assessed eligibility, assessed trial quality and extracted data. Seventeen studies were included. Ten were conducted in a school setting, two in universities, and five in workplaces. One study directly measured health outcomes, and all included studies measured travel outcomes. Two cluster randomised controlled trials in the school setting showed either no change in travel mode or mixed results. A randomised controlled trial in the workplace setting, conducted in a pre-selected group who were already contemplating or preparing for active travel, found improved health-related quality of life on some sub scales, and increased walking. Two controlled before-after studies found that school travel interventions increased walking. Other studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. No included studies were conducted in low- or middle-income countries, and no studies measured the social distribution of effects or adverse effects, such as injury. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether organisational travel plans are effective for improving health or changing travel mode. Organisational travel plans should be considered as complex health promotion interventions, with considerable potential to influence community health outcomes depending on the environmental context in which they are introduced. Given the current lack of evidence, organisational travel plans should be implemented in the context of robustly-designed research studies, such as well-designed cluster randomised trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 330 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 323 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 62 19%
Researcher 49 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 13%
Student > Bachelor 29 9%
Student > Postgraduate 20 6%
Other 60 18%
Unknown 66 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 23%
Social Sciences 36 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 11%
Psychology 33 10%
Sports and Recreations 11 3%
Other 58 18%
Unknown 81 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 March 2016.
All research outputs
#19,711,573
of 24,228,883 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11,986
of 12,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,703
of 109,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#67
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,228,883 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,873 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 109,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.