Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Carol M. Werner x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Barbara B. Brown and Carol M. Werner

Background:

Accelerometer output feedback might enable assessment of recall biases for moderate bouts by obese and nonobese individuals; accelerometry might also help residents recall destinations for moderate-intensity walking bouts.

Methods:

Adult residents’ 1-week accelerometer-measured physical activity and obesity status were measured before and after a new rail stop opened (n = 51 Time 1; n = 47 Time 2). Participants recalled the week’s walking bouts, described them as brisk (moderate) or not, and reported a rail stop destination or not.

Results:

At the end of the week, we provided accelerometry output to residents as a prompt. Recall of activity intensity was accurate for about 60% of bouts. Nonobese participants had more moderate bouts and more “stealth exercise” —moderate bouts recalled as not brisk—than did obese individuals. Obese participants had more overestimates—recalling light bouts as brisk walks—than did nonobese individuals. Compared with unprompted recall, accelerometry-prompted recalls allowed residents to describe where significantly more moderate bouts of activity occurred.

Conclusion:

Coupling accelerometry feedback with self-report improves research by measuring the duration, intensity, and destination of walking bouts. Recall errors and different patterns of errors by obese and nonobese individuals underscore the importance of validation by accelerometry.

Restricted access

Barbara B. Brown, Ken R. Smith, Doug Tharp, Carol M. Werner, Calvin P. Tribby, Harvey J. Miller and Wyatt Jensen

Background:

Complete streets require evaluation to determine if they encourage active transportation.

Methods:

Data were collected before and after a street intervention provided new light rail, bike lanes, and better sidewalks in Salt Lake City, Utah. Residents living near (<800 m) and far (≥801 to 2000 m) from the street were compared, with sensitivity tests for alternative definitions of near (<600 and <1000 m). Dependent variables were accelerometer/global positioning system (GPS) measures of transit trips, nontransit walking trips, and biking trips that included the complete street corridor.

Results:

Active travel trips for Near-Time 2 residents, the group hypothesized to be the most active, were compared with the other 3 groups (Near-Time 1, Far-Time 1, and Far-Time 2), net of control variables. Near-Time 2 residents were more likely to engage in complete street transit walking trips (35%, adjusted) and nontransit walking trips (50%) than the other 3 groups (24% to 25% and 13% to 36%, respectively). Bicycling was less prevalent, with only 1 of 3 contrasts significant (10% of Near-Time 2 residents had complete street bicycle trips compared with 5% of Far-Time 1 residents).

Conclusions:

Living near the complete street intervention supported more pedestrian use and possibly bicycling, suggesting complete streets are also public health interventions.