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