Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan 23;12(1):14–24. doi: 10.1159/000496118

Table 1.

Characteristics of the study population (n = 5,199) and descriptive information regarding the physical and social environment in neighbourhoods

Sociodemographic characteristics n Mean (SD) or percentages
Age in years 5,149 52.2 (16.3)
Sex (% female) 5,148 55.3
Educational level (% higher) 4,703 54.1
Length of residency (10 years or more) 4,994 65.0
BMI (kg/m2) 4,614 25.2 (4.5)
Overweight status (% BMI ≥25.0) 4,614 45.3

Physical neighbourhood factors (range)
 Neighbourhood-level RAD (% high) 5,199 49.6
  Presence of recreational facilities*, 1 (3–7) 5,199 4.8 (1.1)
  Features of the active transportation environment*, 1 (7–19) 5,199 12.6 (2.8)
 Neighbourhood aesthetics*, 1 (6–17) 5,199 11.5 (2.4)
 mRFEI (0–100) 4,942 43.2 (24.4)
Social neighbourhood factors
  Social network construct*, 2 4,790 10.4 (3.7)
  First tertile (social network score <9) 1,545 32.3
   Second tertile (social network score ≥9 and ≤12) 1,837 38.4
  Third tertile (social network score >12) 1,408 29.4
   Social cohesion construct*, 2 4,758 17.4 (3.6)
  First tertile (social cohesion score <16) 1,284 27.0
   Second tertile (social cohesion score ≥16 and ≤19) 2,067 43.4
  Third tertile (social cohesion score >19) 1,407 29.6
  Social trust*, 2 4,891 3.5 (0.9)
  Strongly disagree 204 4.2
  Disagree 342 7.0
  Neither agree or disagree 1,591 32.5
  Agree 2,299 47.0
  Strongly agree 455 9.3
  Neighbourhood SES (% high) 5,199 50.4
   Perceived crime*, 2 4,819 3.4 (1.1)
  Strongly disagree 664 13.8
  Disagree 1,712 35.5
  Neither agree or disagree 1,544 32.0
  Agree 581 12.1
  Strongly agree 318 6.6
*

Individual sum scores.

1

Higher scores indicate a more activity-friendly neighbourhood.

2

Higher scores indicate more social networks, or higher social trust, or social cohesion, or perceived crime. BMI, body mass index measured in kg/m2; RAD, residential area density; mRFEI, modified retail food environment index calculated by dividing the number of healthy food outlets by the total number of healthy and unhealthy food outlets and multiplying this by 100; SES, socio-economic status.