Skip to main content

Table 2 Within and between city differences in physical activity behaviour by dog walking status

From: The association between dog walking, physical activity and owner’s perceptions of safety: cross-sectional evidence from the US and Australia

 

San Diego (n = 276)

Portland (n = 233)

Nashville (n = 296)

Perth (n = 308)

Significant between city comparisons (Dog walkers)2

 

Non-dog walker1 (n = 134) Mean (SE)

Dog walker (n = 142) Mean (SE)

Non-dog walker1 (n = 110) Mean (SE)

Dog walker (n = 123) Mean (SE)

Non-dog walker1 (n = 141) Mean (SE)

Dog walker (n = 155) Mean (SE)

Non-dog walker1 (n = 105) Mean (SE)

Dog walker (n = 203) Mean (SE)

p-value

≥30mins moderate-vigorous physical activity (days/week)

3.5 (2.5)

4.3 (2.2)**

3.2 (2.5)

4.0 (2.2)*

2.9 (2.3)

4.1 (2.2)***

2.8 (2.6)

3.9 (2.6)***

0.467

Frequency of neighbourhood walking/week

2.3 (2.7)

7.6 (4.0)***

2.1 (2.6)

6.5 (3.8)***

1.6 (2.1)

6.7 (4.4)***

1.9 (2.8)

6.4 (3.8)***

0.027 PE < SD

Walk in local park (%)

17.2

45.1***

12.7

42.3***

11.3

28.4***

19.0

80.3***

0.000 PE > SD, PL, NV

Frequency of dog walking/week

-

6.0 (4.0)

-

5.1 (3.6)

-

5.3 (3.9)

-

5.0 (3.4)

0.074

Minutes of dog walking/week

-

108.6 (134.8)

-

93.5 (106.3)

-

108.1 (142.9)

-

92.8 (115.0)

0.510

  1. *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01; ***p ≤ 0.001; 1Reference group; SD San Diego, PL Portland, NV Nashville, PE Perth
  2. 1Reference group = Non-dog walker
  3. 2Reference group = Perth