. 2024 Aug 30;24:2361. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-19733-x

Table 3.

Summary of results for each of the four types of built environment

Environment	Area-specific results	Individual-specific results
Walking infrastructure	- High-SES areas generally show higher walkability scores and PA. - Built environmental quality, such as pedestrian infrastructure, impacts walkability and is typically perceived more pleasant in higher-income areas. - Urban areas with higher intersection density and connectivity tend to promote walking, while remote areas often lack adequate infrastructure for PA. - Studies present mixed findings on walkability scores across SES areas.	- Lower income and education levels correlate with less usage of walkable areas. - Higher-income individuals tend to have better walking infrastructure opportunities. - Perceptions of safety and aesthetics influence walking behaviour, and often play more importance than the built environment.
Cycling Infrastructure	- Generally fewer biking paths in low-SES areas. - Quality and connectivity of cycling infrastructure vary by area-SES; however, it tends to be best in high-SES areas.	- Cycling for transport tends to be more common in higher SES groups. - Individuals with higher income and education levels, are more likely to have access to cycling infrastructure. - Infrastructure expenditure is typically linked to increased cycling.
Neighbourhood Parks and Open Spaces	- Several positive associations between access to green spaces and PA, with variations by SES. - Safety and accessibility of parks influence utilization, especially in low-income areas.	- Access to green spaces seems to boosts PA, especially in lower SES groups. - Safety perceptions crucial for park use. - The perception of opportunities for PA in green spaces are crucial for PA.
Sports Facilities	- Varied access to sports facilities by SES, with rural areas often having better access. - Quality and availability of facilities tends to impact PA engagement. - Disparities in perceived access to sports facilities exist based on income areas, with social factors often influencing PA more than built environmental factors.	- Social support and fewer barriers to PA noted among higher-income participants. - Lower SES and education levels is often associated with reduced facility usage. - Objective access and personal factors impact PA adherence, with subjective perceptions of access not always correlating with participation.

Environment

Area-specific results

Individual-specific results

Walking infrastructure

- High-SES areas generally show higher walkability scores and PA.

- Built environmental quality, such as pedestrian infrastructure, impacts walkability and is typically perceived more pleasant in higher-income areas.

- Urban areas with higher intersection density and connectivity tend to promote walking, while remote areas often lack adequate infrastructure for PA.

- Studies present mixed findings on walkability scores across SES areas.

- Lower income and education levels correlate with less usage of walkable areas.

- Higher-income individuals tend to have better walking infrastructure opportunities.

- Perceptions of safety and aesthetics influence walking behaviour, and often play more importance than the built environment.

Cycling Infrastructure

- Generally fewer biking paths in low-SES areas.

- Quality and connectivity of cycling infrastructure vary by area-SES; however, it tends to be best in high-SES areas.

- Cycling for transport tends to be more common in higher SES groups.

- Individuals with higher income and education levels, are more likely to have access to cycling infrastructure.

- Infrastructure expenditure is typically linked to increased cycling.

Neighbourhood Parks and Open Spaces

- Several positive associations between access to green spaces and PA, with variations by SES.

- Safety and accessibility of parks influence utilization, especially in low-income areas.

- Access to green spaces seems to boosts PA, especially in lower SES groups.

- Safety perceptions crucial for park use.

- The perception of opportunities for PA in green spaces are crucial for PA.

Sports Facilities

- Varied access to sports facilities by SES, with rural areas often having better access.

- Quality and availability of facilities tends to impact PA engagement.

- Disparities in perceived access to sports facilities exist based on income areas, with social factors often influencing PA more than built environmental factors.

- Social support and fewer barriers to PA noted among higher-income participants.

- Lower SES and education levels is often associated with reduced facility usage.

- Objective access and personal factors impact PA adherence, with subjective perceptions of access not always correlating with participation.