Table 4.

Cross-classified multilevel models predicting the number of 10-minute episodes of walking as a function of active living and socioeconomic area exposures among 2716 residents of Montreal, Canada.

	Model 1^a	Model 2^b	Model 3^c
	ERR (95% CI)^d	ERR (95% CI)	ERR (95% CI)
Walking for any motive
Categories of exposure in zones
Low-density suburban	1.00	1.00	1.00
Middle-density suburban	1.03 (0.69, 1.53)	0.98 (0.66, 1.46)	0.97 (0.65, 1.44)
Suburban/urban axial	0.94 (0.64, 1.39)	0.93 (0.63, 1.36)	0.95 (0.65, 1.39)
Mix urban/suburban	1.03 (0.71, 1.52)	1.04 (0.71, 1.52)	1.07 (0.73, 1.55)
Urban residential	0.93 (0.61, 1.40)	0.95 (0.63, 1.43)	0.97 (0.65, 1.46)
Diverse central urban	1.19 (0.81, 1.75)	1.16 (0.80, 1.70)	1.22 (0.84, 1.78)
Central urban with high accessibility	1.42 (0.96, 2.11)^*	1.37 (0.93, 2.02)	1.42 (0.97, 2.09)^*
Proportion of university graduates in census tracts
Lower tertile		1.01 (0.84, 1.20)	1.02 (0.86, 1.21)
Middle tertile		1.00	1.00
Higher tertile		1.23 (1.04, 1.46)^**	1.25 (1.06, 1.49)^**
Utilitarian walking
Categories of exposure in zones
Low-density suburban	1.00	1.00	1.00
Middle-density suburban	1.27 (0.66, 2.45)	1.23 (0.65, 2.36)	1.16 (0.61, 2.22)
Suburban/urban axial	1.14 (0.60, 2.16)	1.14 (0.61, 2.14)	1.14 (0.61, 2.13)
Mix urban/suburban	1.35 (0.72, 2.54)	1.38 (0.75, 2.58)	1.39 (0.75, 2.57)
Urban residential	1.17 (0.60, 2.28)	1.21 (0.63, 2.35)	1.20 (0.62, 2.31)
Diverse central urban	1.80 (0.96, 3.38)^*	1.77 (0.95, 3.30)^*	1.87 (1.00, 3.47)^**
Central urban with high accessibility	1.98 (1.03, 3.78)^**	1.91 (1.01, 3.61)^**	1.92 (1.02, 3.65)^**
Proportion of university graduates in census tracts
Lower tertile		1.03 (0.80, 1.34)	1.06 (0.82, 1.36)
Middle tertile		1.00	1.00
Higher tertile		1.30 (1.01, 1.68)^**	1.33 (1.04, 1.71)^**
Recreational walking
Categories of exposure in zones
Low-density suburban	1.00	1.00	1.00
Middle-density suburban	0.78 (0.51, 1.21)	0.73 (0.47, 1.13)	0.75 (0.49, 1.16)
Suburban/urban axial	0.77 (0.50, 1.17)	0.74 (0.49, 1.13)	0.75 (0.50, 1.13)
Mix urban/suburban	0.76 (0.50, 1.15)	0.76 (0.50, 1.15)	0.78 (0.52, 1.17)
Urban residential	0.70 (0.44, 1.11)	0.72 (0.45, 1.14)	0.76 (0.49, 1.19)
Diverse central urban	0.66 (0.43, 1.01)^*	0.64 (0.41, 0.98)^**	0.65 (0.43, 0.99)^**
Central urban with high accessibility	0.86 (0.55, 1.33)	0.82 (0.53, 1.27)	0.86 (0.56, 1.31)
Proportion of university graduates in census tracts
Lower tertile		0.95 (0.77, 1.19)	0.95 (0.77, 1.18)
Middle tertile		1.00	1.00
Higher tertile		1.20 (0.97, 1.49)^*	1.24 (1.01, 1.54)^**

p < 0.10;

^**

p < 0.05.

Model 1: associations between active living potential and walking.

Model 2: associations between active living potential, area-level socioeconomic position, and walking.

Model 3: Model 2 adjusted for individual characteristics.

ERR (95%CI): event rate ratio and 95% confidence intervals.