Table 3.
Association between walking and cycling to any amenity and anthropometrics and fitnessa (coeff (95% CI))b
| Men | Women | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| BMI (kg/m2) | Walk-only | −0.46 (−1.08, 0.17) | −0.62 (−1.33, 0.10) |
| Any cycling | −0.34 (−1.12, 0.44) | −1.68 (−2.81, −0.55)* | |
| Waist circumference (cm) | Walk-only | −1.63 (−3.18, −0.09)* | −0.33 (−1.78, 1.11) |
| Any cycling | −2.27 (−4.22, −0.32)* | −3.41 (−5.71, −1.11)* | |
| Fitness (treadmill test duration, in seconds) | Walk-only | 14.31 (−0.48, 29.10) | 17.07 (5.37, 28.77)* |
| Any cycling | 27.01 (8.39, 45.63)* | 36.65 (17.99, 55.31)* | |
a
All variables drawn from exam Year 20 (2005–06) of the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study.
b
Estimated from linear regression modeling anthropometrics or fitness as a function of “walking only” to any destination and “any cycling” to any destination, controlling for age, race, education, household income, alcohol intake, physical activity other than walking, and study center. Dichotomous “other” mode combinations were included in the model but not presented, and “car-only” to any destination was excluded and therefore the comparison group)
*
Bold font indicates significant (p<0.05)