title: Is a perceived supportive physical environment important for self-reported leisure time physical activity among socioeconomically disadvantaged women with poor psychosocial characteristics? An observational study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Over the past decade, studies and public health interventions that target the physical environment as an avenue for promoting physical activity have increased in number. While it appears that a supportive physical environment has a role to play in promoting physical activity, social-ecological models emphasise the importance of considering other multiple levels of influence on behaviour, including individual (e.g. self-efficacy, intentions, enjoyment) and social (e.g. social support, access to childcare) factors (psychosocial factors). However, not everyone has these physical activity-promoting psychosocial characteristics; it remains unclear what contribution the environment makes to physical activity among these groups. This study aimed to examine the association between the perceived physical environment and self-reported leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) among women living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas demonstrating different psychosocial characteristics.
  
  
  METHODS
  In 2007-8, 3765 women (18-45 years) randomly selected from low socioeconomic areas in Victoria, Australia, self-reported LTPA, and individual, social and physical environmental factors hypothesised within a social-ecological framework to influence LTPA. Psychosocial and environment scores were created. Associations between environment scores and categories of LTPA (overall and stratified by thirds of perceived environment scores) were examined using generalised ordered logistic regression.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Women with medium and high perceived environment scores had 20-38% and 44-70% greater odds respectively of achieving higher levels of LTPA than women with low environment scores. When stratified by thirds of psychosocial factor scores, these associations were largely attenuated and mostly became non-significant. However, women with the lowest psychosocial scores but medium or high environment scores had 76% and 58% higher odds respectively of achieving ≥120 minutes/week (vs. <120 minutes/week) LTPA.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Acknowledging the cross-sectional study design, the findings suggest that a physical environment perceived to be supportive of physical activity might help women with less favourable psychosocial characteristics achieve moderate amounts of LTPA (i.e. ≥120 minutes/week). This study provides further support for research and public health interventions to target perceptions of the physical environment as a key component of strategies to promote physical activity.
authors.affiliation: Centre for Physical Activity & Nutrition Research, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia.
authors.forename: Verity J
authors.initials: VJ
authors.lastname: Cleland
authors.forename: Kylie
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Ball
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Crawford
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D004779:Environment Design; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007899:Leisure Activities / Q000523:psychology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009043:Motor Activity; D011204:Poverty Areas; D012111:Residence Characteristics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D057566:Self Report; D014739:Victoria; D035862:Vulnerable Populations / Q000523:psychology* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2003 Sep;93(9):1583-9
references.pmid: 12948984
references.citation: Prev Med. 1987 Nov;16(6):825-36
references.pmid: 3432232
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007 Feb;61(2):108-14
references.pmid: 17234868
references.citation: Am J Epidemiol. 2007 Apr 15;165(8):858-67
references.pmid: 17329713
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2002 Jun;54(12):1793-812
references.pmid: 12113436
references.citation: Am J Health Behav. 2008 Nov-Dec;32(6):701-13
references.pmid: 18442349
references.citation: Health Psychol. 2013 Jul;32(7):729-38
references.pmid: 22612557
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2012 May;74(10):1578-83
references.pmid: 22464221
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2009 Jan 16;9:21
references.pmid: 19149865
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2010 Jun;70(12):2011-2018
references.pmid: 20362380
references.citation: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003 Aug;35(8):1381-95
references.pmid: 12900694
references.citation: Res Q Exerc Sport. 1992 Mar;63(1):60-6
references.pmid: 1574662
references.citation: Med J Aust. 2010 Feb 1;192(3):137-40
references.pmid: 20121680
references.citation: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012 Sep 19;9:116
references.pmid: 22992350
references.citation: Am Psychol. 1992 Jan;47(1):6-22
references.pmid: 1539925
references.citation: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002 Dec;34(12):1996-2001
references.pmid: 12471307
references.citation: World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2000;894:i-xii, 1-253
references.pmid: 11234459
references.citation: Prev Med. 2008 Jan;46(1):46-54
references.pmid: 17881044
references.citation: Int J Obes (Lond). 2009 Nov;33(11):1289-98
references.pmid: 19721449
references.citation: Health Educ Res. 2010 Apr;25(2):268-81
references.pmid: 18974098
references.citation: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007 Aug;39(8):1423-34
references.pmid: 17762377
references.citation: Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2005 Oct;33(4):175-81
references.pmid: 16239834
references.citation: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2010 May 03;7:32
references.pmid: 20438632