Skip to main content

Table 5 Presence of items on aesthetics along actual cycling routes compared to shortest cycling routes

From: Differences in physical environmental characteristics between adolescents’ actual and shortest cycling routes: a study using a Google Street View-based audit

Item Actual cycling route (m/km; M ± SD) Shortest cycling route (m/km; M ± SD) OR (95% CI)
Trees 459 ± 241 428 ± 294 1.04 (0.88; 1.24)
Attractive buildings 60 ± 111 70 ± 134 0.94 (0.65; 1.37)
Well-maintained buildings 501 ± 240 500 ± 287 1.00 (0.84; 1.19)
Front yards 297 ± 257 328 ± 294 0.96 (0.81; 1.13)
Well-maintained front yards 315 ± 247 398 ± 274 0.88 (0.73; 1.07)
Attractive natural features 250 ± 310 163 ± 243 1.12 (0.95; 1.33)
Graffiti and litter 120 ± 201 93 ± 205 1.07 (0.85; 1.35)
  1. Reference = shortest cycling route. For ease of interpretation of OR, distances were converted to hectometres (100 m/km)
  2. OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval
  3. *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01; tp ≤ 0.1