Skip to main content

Table 5 Composite Index (C.I.) scores for each super neighborhood by built environment domains and expected relationship (P/Na) with physical activity. Houston TRAIN Study, 2014

From: Foot-based audit of streets adjacent to new light rail stations in Houston, Texas: measurement of health-related characteristics of the built environment for physical activity research

 

Northside/ Northline

Northside Village

Downtown

Second Ward

Magnolia Park

Greater Eastwood

Greater Third Ward

OST/ South Union

ALL

Segments N (%)

28 (4.75)

214 (36.27)

118 (20)

78 (13.22)

36 (6.1)

14 (2.37)

42 (7.12)

60 (10.17)

590 (100)

Land use

 Positive

2.00

1.25

1.25

1.25

1.63

1.50

1.25

1.50

1.25

 Negative

3.83

3.17

3.00

3.50

3.67

3.33

2.67

3.00

3.00

Transportation

 Positive

3.72

3.72

4.67

3.83

4.06

4.17

4.06

4.06

4.06

 Negative

1.00

2.50

2.00

3.50

4.00

3.50

1.50

2.00

2.50

Facilities

 Positive

1.67

1.00

1.33

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.33

1.67

1.00

Aesthetics

 Positive

5.50

5.00

6.00

5.00

4.00

5.00

5.50

5.50

5.50

 Negative

4.50

3.83

4.50

4.17

4.83

4.50

4.17

3.67

4.17

Signage

 Positive

1.80

1.60

2.00

1.60

1.80

1.40

2.00

1.40

1.60

 Negative

3.50

2.50

1.50

2.50

2.50

2.00

2.00

2.50

2.50

Social environment

 Positive

3.17

2.67

3.00

2.17

2.50

2.17

2.33

3.00

2.83

 Negative

2.00

2.00

1.00

2.00

1.00

3.00

2.00

1.00

2.00

  1. aObserved features were arranged into two classes: positive (P) and negative (N). This classification was based on the expected direction of the relationship between each feature and physical activity behavior, as evidenced by findings in available literature