Skip to main content

Table 3 Estimates from linear regression analyses for physical activity volume [total activity counts (TAC, number/day)a and steps (number/day)]

From: Neighborhood walkability, physical activity, and walking for transportation: A cross-sectional study of older adults living on low income

Predictor TAC (n/day) Steps (n/day)  
  Crude   Adjusted Crude Adjusted  
    Model 2c   Model 3d     Model 4c   Model 5e  
  (n = 141)b   (n = 141)b fit on a line   (n = 131)   (n = 141)b   (n = 141)   (n = 138)  
  β (95% CI) P β (95% CI) P β (95% CI) P β (95% CI) P β (95% CI) P β (95% CI) P
Street Smart Walk Score (10-point change) 1.01 (0.97, 1.05) 0.546 1.02 (0.99, 1.07) 0.221 1.00 (0.96, 1.04) 0.991 51 (−148, 250) 0.612 102 (−93, 297) 0.304 −23 (−207, 160) 0.801
Women 0.98 (0.8, 1.21) 0.876 0.98 (0.8, 1.19) 0.816 0.90 (0.74, 1.10) 0.308 61 (−978, 1101) 0.907 31 (−975, 1038) 0.951 −347 (−1309, 616) 0.478
Age (10-year change) 0.74 (0.63, 0.87)* <0.001 0.73 (0.62, 0.85)* <0.001 0.81 (0.70, 0.95)* 0.011 −1298 (−2091,−505)* 0.002 −1362 (−2168,−557)* 0.001 −903 (−1642,−164)* 0.017
Vehicle available 0.86 (0.71, 1.06) 0.156 - - 0.94 (0.79, 1.12) 0.495 −695 (−1687, 297) 0.168 - - −293 (−1150, 565) 0.500
Aestheticsf 1.23 (1.07, 1.42)* 0.004 - - 1.08 (0.94, 1.23) 0.272 879 (178, 1580)* 0.014 - - 233 (−415, 881) 0.478
Crimeg 1.11 (0.96, 1.28) 0.173 - - 1.07 (0.95, 1.22) 0.272 - - - - - -
Body mass index (kg/m2) 0.96 (0.94, 0.97)* <0.001 - - 0.97 (0.96, 0.99)* 0.004 −234 (−316,−152)* <0.001 - - −162 (−245,−79)* <0.001
Comorbiditiesh 0.92 (0.87, 0.96)* <0.001 - - 0.97 (0.92, 1.02) 0.180 −399 (−625,−173)* 0.001 - - −120 (−336, 97) 0.276
Gait speed (m/s)i 2.79 (1.94, 4.02)* <0.001 - - 1.40 (0.90, 2.18) 0.140 4816 (2997, 6635)* <0.001 - - 1738 (−397, 3873) 0.110
Very much like to walkj 1.67 (1.37, 2.04)* <0.001 - - 1.32 (1.07, 1.63)* 0.010 2495 (1519, 3471)* <0.001 - - 1342 (337, 2346)* 0.009
Ambulatory Confidencek 1.13 (1.06, 1.19)* <0.001 - - 1.01 (0.95, 1.09) 0.690 546 (259, 834)* <0.001 - - 98 (223, 418) 0.547
  1. aTAC (number/day) presented as exponentiated regression coefficients
  2. bnvehicle available = 140; naesthetics = 140; ntraffic hazards = 135; ncomorbidities = 139
  3. cAdjusted for Street Smart Walk Score, gender, age
  4. dAdjusted for all predictor variables listed in this table
  5. eAdjusted for all predictor variables listed in this table with the exception of crime, since crime was not associated with steps (n/day) at p ≤ 0.2 in bivariate analyses
  6. f Neighbourhood Environment Walkability Scale—abbreviated (NEWS-A) Subscale F: Aesthetics (four-point scale); reverse coded so that higher score indicates better walkability
  7. gNEWS-A Subscale H: Crime (four-point scale); reverse coded so that higher score indicates better walkability
  8. hTotal number; measured with the Functional Comorbidity Index
  9. iAssessed as part of the 4-m walk (usual pace) component of the Short Physical Performance Battery
  10. jVery much like to walk (5 on a 5-point scale) vs. less than very much liking to walk (1–4 on a 5-point scale)
  11. kAssessed by the Ambulatory Self-Confidence Questionnaire
  12. *p < 0.05
Back to article page

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us