Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 105, Issue 5, pp e376–e382 | Cite as

Influence of area deprivation and perceived neighbourhood safety on active transport to school among urban Quebec preadolescents

  • Nicoleta CutumisuEmail author
  • Ariane Bélanger-Gravel
  • Marilie Laferté
  • François Lagarde
  • Jean-Frédéric Lemay
  • Lise Gauvin
Quantitative Research
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examines associations between area deprivation and perceived neighbourhood safety with active transport to school among preadolescents living in urban Quebec.

METHODS: A sample of 809 preadolescents aged 9 to 13 years and one each of their parents living in urban Quebec were recruited by a polling firm for a telephone interview about the Opération WIXX multimedia communication campaign. Opération WIXX was launched in 2012 by Québec en forme to promote physical activity among preadolescents. Logistic regression models predicted active transportation to school (as reported by both the child and his or her parent) from area-level material and social deprivation and from parental and children’s perceptions of neighbourhood safety while controlling for socio-demographic variables.

RESULTS: Child and parental reports of active commuting to school were highly concordant (Kendall’s tau=0.70, p<0.001). Children whose parents felt at ease to let their children actively commute to school (OR=1.75, 95% CI 1.25–2.45; p=0.001) and who lived in areas characterized by the highest material (OR=2.02, 95% CI 1.09–3.76; p=0.026) and social (OR=3.69, 95% CI 2.12–6.42; p<0.001) deprivation were more likely to report actively commuting to school. Parents who felt at ease to let their children actively commute to school (OR=1.60, 95% CI 1.15–2.21; p=0.005) and who lived in neighbourhoods characterized by a higher social deprivation (OR=1.70, 95% CI 1.04–2.79; p=0.036, OR=2.01, 95% CI 1.23–3.29; p=0.006, OR=2.72, 95% CI 1.59–4.63; p<0.001) were more likely to report that their child actively commuted to school.

CONCLUSION: Active commuting to school is associated with parental perceptions of safety and area deprivation.

Keywords

Active transport deprivation perceived safety children 

Résumé

OBJECTIF : L’objectif de cette étude est d’examiner l’influence de la défavorisation et de la sécurité perçue du quartier sur la pratique du transport actif vers l’école chez les préadolescents vivant en milieu urbain au Québec.

MÉTHODE : Un échantillon de 809 dyades de préadolescents âgés de 9-13 ans et un de leurs parents vivant en milieu urbain au Québec a été recruté par une firme de sondage pour répondre à une entrevue téléphonique en lien avec la campagne multimédia Opération WIXX. La campagne multimédia Opération WIXX a été lancée par Québec en Forme en 2012 pour promouvoir l’activité physique chez les préadolescents. Des modèles de régression logistique ont été utilisés pour prédire la pratique du transport actif vers l’école (auto-rapporté par les préadolescents et un de leurs parents) en fonction de la sécurité perçue du quartier par le parent et du préadolescent et des indices de défavorisation matérielle et sociale du quartier. Les analyses ont été ajustées pour les variables sociodémographiques.

RÉSULTATS : La concordance entre les réponses des enfants et des parents concernant la pratique du transport actif vers l’école était élevée (Kendall’s tau=0,70, p<0,001). Les enfants dont les parents percevaient leur quartier comme étant sécuritaire (OR=1,75, IC95% 1,25–2,45; p=0,001) et qui vivaient dans des quartiers caractérisés par une défavorisation matérielle (OR=2,02, IC95% 1,09–3,76; p=0,026) et sociale (OR=3,69, IC95% 2,12–6,42; p≪0,001) supérieure avaient une probabilité plus élevée de se rendre à l’école en utilisant des modes de transport actif. Les parents percevant leur quartier comme étant sécuritaire (OR=1,60, IC95% 1,15–2,21; p=0,005) et qui vivaient dans des quartiers caractérisés par une défavorisation sociale supérieure (OR=1,70 IC95% 1,04–2,79; p=0,036, OR=2,01 IC95% 1,23–3,29; p=0,006, OR=2,72 IC95% 1,59–4,63; p<0,001) avaient une probabilité plus élevée de rapporter que leurs enfants se rendent à l’école en utilisant des modes de transport actif.

CONCLUSION : Le transport actif vers l’école est associé à la sécurité perçue du quartier rapportée par les parents et à la défavorisation du quartier.

Motsclés

transport actif défavorisation du quartier sécurité perçue du quartier les enfants 

References

  1. 1.
    Janssen I. The public health burden of obesity in Canada. Can J Diabetes 2013;37(2):90–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Showell NN, Fawole O, Segal J, Wilson RF, Cheskin LJ, Bleich SN, et al. A systematic review of home based childhood obesity prevention studies. Pediatrics 2013;132(1):e193–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davison KK, Werder JL, Lawson CT. Children’s active commuting to school: Current knowledge and future directions. Prev Chronic Dis 2008;5(3):A100.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pont K, Ziviani J, Wadley D, Bennett S, Abbott R. Environmental correlates of children’s active transportation: A systematic literature review. Health Place 2009;15:849–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Timperio A, Crawford D, Telford A, Salmon J. Perceptions about the local neighborhood and walking and cycling among children. Prev Med 2004;38(1):39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carver A, Timperio A, Crawford D. Playing it safe: The influence of neighbourhood safety on children’s physical activity—A review. Health Place 2008;14(2):217–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Timperio A, Ball K, Salmon J, Roberts R, Giles-Corti B, Simmons D, et al. Personal, family, social, and environmental correlates of active commuting to school. Am J Prev Med 2006;30(1):45–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hume C, Timperio A, Salmon J, Carver A, Giles-Corti B, Crawford D. Walking and cycling to school: Predictors of increases among children and adolescents. Am J Prev Med 2009;36(3):195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stewart O. Findings from research on active transportation to school and implications for safe routes to school programs. J Plan Lit 2011;26:127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pabayo R, Gauvin L, Barnett T. Longitudinal changes in active transportation to school in Canadian youth aged 6 through 16 years. Pediatrics 2011;128(2):e404–13. Epub 2011 Jul 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pabayo RA, Gauvin L, Barnett TA, Morency P, Nikiéma B, Séguin L. Understanding the determinants of active transportation to school among children: Evidence of environmental injustice from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. Health Place 2012;18(2):163–71, doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2011.08.017. Epub 2011 Sep 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pabayo R, Gauvin L. Proportions of students who use various modes of transportation to and from school in a representative population-based sample of children and adolescents, 1999. Prev Med 2008;46(1):63–66. Epub 2007 Aug 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faulkner GEJ, Richichi V, Buliung RN, Fusco C, Moola F. What’s “quickest and easiest?”: Parental decision making about school trip mode. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2010;7:62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Posner JC, Liao E, Winston FK, Cnaan A, Shaw KN, Durbin DR. Exposure to traffic among urban children injured as pedestrians. Inj Prev 2002;8:231–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yannakoulias N, Scott DM. The effects of local and non-local traffic on child pedestrian safety: A spatial displacement of risk. Soc Sci Med 2013;80:96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sirard JR, Slater ME. Walking and bicycling to school: A review. Am J Lifestyle Med 2008;2:372–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Panter JR, Jones AP, Van Sluijs EMF, Griffin SJ. Neighborhood, route, and school environments and children’s active commuting. Am J Prev Med 2010;38(3):268–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kerr J, Rosenberg D, Sallis J, Saelens B, Frank L, Conway T, et al. Active commuting to school: Associations with environment and parental concerns. Med Sci Sport Exerc 2006;38:787–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kamphuis CBM, Mackenbach JP, Giskes K, Huisman M, Brug J, vanLenthe FJ. Why do poor people perceive poor neighbourhoods? The role of objective neighbourhood features and psychosocial factors. Health Place 2010;16:744–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Elo IT, Mykyta L, Margolis R, Culhane JF. Perceptions of neighborhood disorder: The role of individual and neighborhood characteristics. Soc Sci Q 2009;90(5):1298–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lemay J-F, Lagarde F, Gauvin L. Cadre d’évaluation des retombées de la campagne de promotion sur un mode de vie physiquement actif auprès des préados québécois 2012–2016. Québec en Forme, 23 avril 2012. Available at: http://www.operationwixx.ca/documents/files/cadre-d-evaluation-3-5-2012-04-23-mise-en-page-novembre-2012.pdf (Accessed January 7, 2014).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Statistics Canada. Postal Code Conversion File (PCCF), Reference Guide. (Catalogue No. 92-153-XCB). Ottawa, ON, 2011. Available at: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/92-153-g/92-153-g2011002-eng.pdf (Accessed February 28, 2014).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pampalon R, Hamel D, Gamache P. A comparison of individual and area-based socio-economic data for monitoring social inequalities in health. Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 82-003-XPE. Health Rep 2009;20(3).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    IBM SPSS Statistics. SPSS for Mac, Mac OS X 10.9.3, Version 22.0.0.1. Chicago, IL: IBM Corporation, 2014.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cragg S, Cameron C, Craig CL. 2004 National Transportation Survey. Ottawa: Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute, 2006.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mammen G, Faulkner G, Buliung R, Lay J. Understanding the drive to escort: A cross-sectional analysis examining parental attitudes towards children’s school travel and independent mobility. BMC Public Health 2012;12:862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Morency P, Voyer C, Burrows S, Goudreau S. Outdoor falls in an urban context: Winter weather impacts and geographical variations. Can J Public Health 2012;103(3):218–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Child-Friendly Cities promoted by UNICEF National Committee and Country Offices–fact Sheet, September 2009. Available at: http://childfriendlycities.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/pdf/CFCI-fact-sheet-14-sept-final.pdf (Accessed February 20, 2014).
  29. 29.
    Lester S, Russell W. Children’s right to play: An examination of the importance of play in the lives of children worldwide. The Hague: Bernard van Leer Foundation, 2010.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Giles-Corti B, Wood G, Pikora T, Learnihan V, Bulsara M, VanNiel K, et al. School site and the potential to walk to school: The impact of street connectivity and traffic exposure in school neighborhoods. Health Place 2011;17:545–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicoleta Cutumisu
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ariane Bélanger-Gravel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marilie Laferté
    • 3
  • François Lagarde
    • 4
  • Jean-Frédéric Lemay
    • 5
  • Lise Gauvin
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre - Centre de Recherche du Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CRCHUM)MontrealCanada
  2. 2.Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Public HealthUniversity of MontrealMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Québec en formeTrois-RivièresCanada
  4. 4.The Lucie et André Chagnon FoundationMontrealCanada
  5. 5.JFL ConsultantsMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations