Table 2.
Associations between whether the school offered Bikeability and children’s cycling behaviour across the study population (N = 3336)
| Outcome | Exposure group | Percentage (95 % CI) | Unadjusted analysis (risk ratio, 95 % CI) | Adjusted analysis (risk ratio, 95 % CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Child cycles at least once a week | Control group | 49.0 (45.4, 52.6) | 1 | 1 |
| Intervention group | 49.6 (47.6, 51.5) | 1.02 (0.92, 1.13) | 0.99 (0.89, 1.10) | |
| Child ever cycles | Control group | 84.7 (82.0, 87.2) | 1 | 1 |
| Intervention group | 84.5 (83.1, 85.9) | 0.99 (0.95, 1.03) | 0.99 (0.95, 1.04) | |
| Child usually travels to school by bike | Control group | 2.8 (1.8, 4.3) | 1 | 1 |
| Intervention group | 2.8 (2.2, 3.5) | 0.98 (0.57, 1.69) | 0.73 (0.41, 1.29) | |
| Child makes local bike trips independentlya | Control group | 50.1 (46.5, 53.6) | 1 | 1 |
| Intervention group | 51.5 (49.5, 53.5) | 1.00 (0.91, 1.09) | 0.97 (0.89, 1.06) |
All p ≥ 0.4 for association. Analyses based on our study population of 3336 children, of whom 773 were in the control group and 2563 in the intervention group. Adjusted analyses adjusted for all variables shown in Table 1 (with the local prevalence of cycling to work entered as a continuous variable), and also for the region of England that the child lived in and the season of data collection
CI confidence interval
a Defined as ever making local, non-school bicycle trips without an adult, either on their own or with other children