Evaluating the performance of spatial indicators of destination accessibility for physical activity research: a comparative international analysis

Neighbourhoods with good access to various destinations facilitate engagement in physical activity. Because spatial indicators of destination accessibility can be operationalised in numerous ways, it is important to evaluate their ability to explain physical activity in various geographical and cultural contexts. We evaluated established as well as novel spatial indicators of destination accessibility using data from 12 cities/regions participating in an international study on adolescents' physical activity. Twelve spatial indicators of destination accessibility were developed using land use data. Five indicators represented measures of destination intensity (density), two were indicators of destination heterogeneity [land use mix (LUM) indices], and the remaining five were novel measures of combined destination intensity and heterogeneity. To evaluate these spatial indicators, we examined their performance as correlates of parent-perceived destination accessibility and adolescents' physical activity, and the extent to which the findings were generalisable across cities/regions. Substantial differences in ability to explain physical activity and comparability across geographical locations were observed across the indicators. The best performing indicator, defined as being a consistent correlate of parental perceptions of destination accessibility and adolescents' physical activity in the expected direction and across cities/regions, was a novel hybrid intensity + heterogeneity indicator: gross density of non-residential destinations weighted by a novel parcel-count-based LUM index. Indicators based on ratios of non-residential land/parcels to residential land/dwelling units performed poorly on most criteria, while LUM indices performed well in relation to transport-related physical activity. We provide recommendations regarding the usage of spatial destination accessibility indicators in physical activity research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cities
Published
2025-05-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2025.106044
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Urban Transport and Accessibility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.35

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating the performance of spatial indicators of destination accessibility for physical activity research: a comparative international analysis

Rodrigo Siqueira Reis, Anna F Timperio, Terry L. Conway, Lawrence D. Frank et al.
2 citations
Cities
Urban Transport and Accessibility
4.35
article

Evaluating the performance of spatial indicators of destination accessibility for physical activity research: a comparative international analysis

Rodrigo Siqueira Reis, Anna F Timperio, Terry L. Conway, Lawrence D. Frank, Ana Queralt, Marc A. Adams, Delfien Van Dyck, Ester Cerin, Scott Duncan, Erica Hinckson, Jan Dygrýn, James F. Sallis, P.P. Wong, Javier Molina‐García, Kelli L. Cain, Jasper Schipperijn, PC Lai
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Neighbourhoods with good access to various destinations facilitate engagement in physical activity. Because spatial indicators of destination accessibility can be operationalised in numerous ways, it is important to evaluate their ability to explain physical activity in various geographical and cultural contexts. We evaluated established as well as novel spatial indicators of destination accessibility using data from 12 cities/regions participating in an international study on adolescents' physical activity. Twelve spatial indicators of destination accessibility were developed using land use data. Five indicators represented measures of destination intensity (density), two were indicators of destination heterogeneity [land use mix (LUM) indices], and the remaining five were novel measures of combined destination intensity and heterogeneity. To evaluate these spatial indicators, we examined their performance as correlates of parent-perceived destination accessibility and adolescents' physical activity, and the extent to which the findings were generalisable across cities/regions. Substantial differences in ability to explain physical activity and comparability across geographical locations were observed across the indicators. The best performing indicator, defined as being a consistent correlate of parental perceptions of destination accessibility and adolescents' physical activity in the expected direction and across cities/regions, was a novel hybrid intensity + heterogeneity indicator: gross density of non-residential destinations weighted by a novel parcel-count-based LUM index. Indicators based on ratios of non-residential land/parcels to residential land/dwelling units performed poorly on most criteria, while LUM indices performed well in relation to transport-related physical activity. We provide recommendations regarding the usage of spatial destination accessibility indicators in physical activity research.

CitiesVol. 163
Biomechanics Institute of Valencia (ES)
National Heart Foundation of Australia, Grantová Agentura České Republiky, Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, Generalitat Valenciana, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Food and Health Bureau, Syddansk Universitet, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, Vlaamse regering, National Institutes of Health, Health and Medical Research Fund
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Urban Transport and Accessibility
4.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.