↓ Skip to main content

Exploring the Cross-Sectional Association between Transit-Oriented Development Zoning and Active Travel and Transit Usage in the United States, 2010–2014

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Exploring the Cross-Sectional Association between Transit-Oriented Development Zoning and Active Travel and Transit Usage in the United States, 2010–2014
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily Thrun, Julien Leider, Jamie F. Chriqui

Abstract

In response to traditional zoning codes that contribute to car-dependent sprawling and disconnected neighborhoods, communities are reforming their land use laws to create pedestrian-friendly areas that promote physical activity. One such reform is the adoption of transit-oriented developments or districts (TODs). TODs are higher density, compact, and mixed use areas located around transit stops that are designed to encourage walking. To identify the characteristics of communities that have adopted TODs in their land use laws and examine if communities that have included TODs in their zoning codes are more likely to have adults that commute by any form of active transportation (i.e., walking, biking, or public transportation) or by using public transportation specifically. Zoning codes effective as of 2010 were obtained for a purposeful sample of the largest 3,914 municipal jurisdictions located in 473 of the most populous U.S. counties and consolidated cities within 48 states and the District of Columbia. They were evaluated to determine whether they included TOD districts or regulations using a coding tool developed by the study team. Descriptive statistics together with t-tests and Pearson's chi-squared independence test were used to compare characteristics of jurisdictions with and without TOD zoning. Multivariate linear regressions were used to compute the adjusted association between TOD zoning and taking public or active transportation to work. Jurisdictions with TOD zoning were located more in the South and West than non-TOD jurisdictions and were more populous, higher income, more racially diverse, and younger. Jurisdictions with TOD zoning had significantly higher percentages of occupied housing with no vehicle than those without TOD zoning. TOD zoning was associated with significantly higher rates of public transportation to work (β = 2.10, 95% CI = 0.88, 3.32) and active transportation to work (β = 2.48, 95% CI = 1.03, 3.94). Communities that have or are considering developing public transit infrastructure may want to modify their zoning codes to include TODs to promote physical activity and active travel to work.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 12 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 19%
Engineering 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 17 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,266,315
of 25,332,933 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,893
of 13,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,064
of 347,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#30
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,332,933 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. 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 347,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.