0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association of Park Renovation With Park Use in New York City

      research-article
      , MBBS, MPH 1 , 2 , , PhD 1 , 2 , , PhD 1 , 2 , , PhD 3 , , PhD 2 , 4 , , PhD, MPH, MBA 1 , 2 ,
      JAMA Network Open
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Is the Community Parks Initiative (CPI), a city-led park redesign and renovation initiative in New York City, associated with park use?

          Findings

          In this quality improvement study, the CPI was associated with a significant net increase in park use at intervention compared with control parks over time, particularly among adults.

          Meaning

          These findings suggest that improving the quality of parks could enhance park use in low-income communities.

          Abstract

          This quality improvement study evaluates the association of the Community Parks Initiative (CPI) with changes in park use and level of physical activity in parks in New York City.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Equity-driven citywide park redesign and renovation, such as the Community Parks Initiative (CPI), has the potential to increase park use and opportunities for physical activity in underserved communities.

          Objective

          To evaluate changes in patterns of park use following park redesign and renovation in low-income New York City (NYC) neighborhoods.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          The Physical Activity and Redesigned Community Spaces study was a prospective quality improvement preintervention-postintervention study design with matched control parks. Thirty-three intervention and 21 control neighborhood parks were selected based on specific criteria related to poverty rates, population growth, and population density in park neighborhoods and not having received more than $250 000 in investment in the past 2 decades. Data were collected at baseline (prerenovation) and 2 follow-up points (3 months and 1 year post renovation) between June 5 and December 4 from 2016 to 2022. Participants were individuals observed as users of study parks.

          Intervention

          The CPI, which involved the redesign and renovation of neighborhood parks by the municipal government of New York City.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Main outcomes encompassed park use and physical activity levels assessed using the well-validated System for Observing Play and Recreation in Communities. Park use was quantified by total number of park users, categorized by age group (≤20 years vs ≥21 years), sex, and physical activity level (sitting or standing vs walking or vigorous activity). Changes in outcomes between groups were compared via the generalized estimation equation.

          Results

          A total of 28 322 park users were observed across 1458 scans. At baseline, 6343 of 10 633 users (59.7%) were 20 years or younger, 4927 of 10 632 (46.3%) were female and 5705 (53.7%) were male, and 4641 of 10 605 (43.8%) were sitting or standing. Intervention parks showed more net park users compared with control parks from baseline to the final follow-up (difference-in-difference relative rate ratio, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.22-2.35] users/scan; P = .002). The association was driven by a significant increase in adult users at intervention parks and overall decrease in all users at control parks. Park users engaging in sitting or standing at intervention parks increased (difference, 4.68 [95% CI, 1.71-7.62] users/scan; P = .002) and park users engaging in walking or vigorous physical activity at control parks decreased (difference, −7.30 [95% CI, −10.80 to −4.26] users/scan; P < .001) over time.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          In this quality improvement study, park redesign and renovation were positively associated with park use in low-income neighborhoods. However, park renovations may need to be accompanied by other programmatic strategies to increase physical activity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Exploring pathways linking greenspace to health: Theoretical and methodological guidance.

          In a rapidly urbanizing world, many people have little contact with natural environments, which may affect health and well-being. Existing reviews generally conclude that residential greenspace is beneficial to health. However, the processes generating these benefits and how they can be best promoted remain unclear.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The relationship between built environments and physical activity: a systematic review.

            We conducted a systematic review of the literature examining the relationship between built environments (e.g., parks, trails, sidewalks) and physical activity (PA) or obesity rates.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Association of proximity and density of parks and objectively measured physical activity in the United States: A systematic review.

              One strategy for increasing physical activity is to create and enhance access to park space. We assessed the literature on the relationship of parks and objectively measured physical activity in population-based studies in the United States (US) and identified limitations in current built environment and physical activity measurement and reporting. Five English-language scholarly databases were queried using standardized search terms. Abstracts were screened for the following inclusion criteria: 1) published between January 1990 and June 2013; 2) US-based with a sample size greater than 100 individuals; 3) included built environment measures related to parks or trails; and 4) included objectively measured physical activity as an outcome. Following initial screening for inclusion by two independent raters, articles were abstracted into a database. Of 10,949 abstracts screened, 20 articles met the inclusion criteria. Five articles reported a significant positive association between parks and physical activity. Nine studies found no association, and six studies had mixed findings. Our review found that even among studies with objectively measured physical activity, the association between access to parks and physical activity varied between studies, possibly due to heterogeneity of exposure measurement. Self-reported (vs. independently-measured) neighborhood park environment characteristics and smaller (vs. larger) buffer sizes were more predictive of physical activity. We recommend strategies for further research, employing standardized reporting and innovative study designs to better understand the relationship of parks and physical activity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                10 April 2024
                April 2024
                10 April 2024
                : 7
                : 4
                : e241429
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Center for Systems and Community Design, Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, City University of New York (CUNY), New York, New York
                [2 ]NYU-CUNY Prevention Research Center, New York, New York
                [3 ]Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill
                [4 ]Department of Population Health, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University (NYU), New York, New York
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: January 15, 2024.
                Published: April 10, 2024. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1429
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2024 Kodali HP et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Terry T.-K. Huang, PhD, MPH, MBA, Center for Systems and Community Design, Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, City University of New York, 55 W 125 St, Room 803, New York, NY 10027 ( terry.huang@ 123456sph.cuny.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Huang had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: All authors.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Kodali, Wyka, Huang.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Kodali, Wyka, Huang.
                Critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Kodali, Wyka.
                Obtained funding: Wyka, Evenson, Thorpe, Huang.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Thorpe.
                Supervision: Wyka, Huang.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was supported by grant R01CA206877 from the National Cancer Institute, grant 16-04236 from the New York State Health Foundation, E4A program grant 76473 from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the Bryant Park Corporation, and grant U48DP006396 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Mr Kodali and Drs Wyka, Huang, and Thorpe).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Disclaimer: The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the funding agencies. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the granting organizations.
                Data Sharing Statement: See Supplement 2.
                Additional Information: The ChatGPT 3.5 version (OpenAI) was used on January 10, 2024, to condense the text throughout the entire article by shortening phrases without introducing new content. The authors meticulously reviewed the suggestions and implemented additional edits where deemed fitting.
                Article
                zoi240079
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1429
                11007573
                38598241
                af27cc2c-92f1-4c3a-b929-b8128e89289b
                Copyright 2024 Kodali HP et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 18 September 2023
                : 15 January 2024
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion

                Comments

                Comment on this article