A number of review studies document associations between the perceived and objectively measured neighborhood environment and physical activity. However, current evidence does not discern whether perceived or objective variables more consistently predict physical activity. A review is needed to examine the comparability of these variables and the consistency of their respective associations with the same physical activity outcome. We systematically searched three databases for studies that examined agreement between perceived and objective measures and/or associations between comparable variables and physical activity. We abstracted 85 relevant peer-reviewed studies published between 1990 and 2015, synthesized agreement coefficients, and compared these variables’ associations with physical activity. Perceived neighborhood environment variables were significantly associated with physical activity (p < .05) at slightly higher rates than objective neighborhood environment variables (20.1% and 13.7%). Comparably defined variables exhibited low agreement and only 8.2% were associated with the same outcome. The perceived neighborhood environment and objectively measured neighborhood environment are related but distinct constructs that account for unique variance in physical activity.

There is need for a youth-informed conceptualization of how environmental and social neighborhood contexts influence physical activity. We assessed youths’ perceptions of their neighborhood physical and peer environments as affecting physical activity. Thirty-three students (20 girls; ages 12-14 years) participated in focus groups about the physical environment and peers within their neighborhoods, and their understanding of how they affect physical activity. Inductive analysis identified themes of access (e.g., to equipment); aesthetics; physical and social safety; peer proximity and behavior (e.g., bullying); adult support or interference; and adult boundary setting. Participants also identified interconnections among themes, such as traffic shaping parent boundary setting and, in turn, access to physical spaces and peers. Young adolescents view neighborhoods in ways similar to and different from adults. Examining physical and social environments in tandem, while mindful of how adults shape and youth perceive these environments, may enhance understanding of youth physical activity behavior.

Background. The built environment predicts walking in older adults, but the degree to which associations between the objective built environment an

There are few studies of built environment associations with physical activity and weight status among older women in large geographic areas that use individual residential buffers to define environmental exposures. Among 23,434 women (70.0 ± 6.9 yr; range = 57–85) in 3 states, relationships between objective built environment variables and meeting physical activity recommendations via walking and weight status were examined. Differences in associations by population density and state were explored in stratified models. Population density (odds ratio [OR] =1.04 [1.02, 1.07]), intersection density (ORs = 1.18–1.28), and facility density (ORs = 1.01–1.53) were positively associated with walking. Density of physical activity facilities was inversely associated with overweight/obesity (OR = 0.69 [0.49, 0.96]). The strongest associations between facility density variables and both outcomes were found among women from higher population density areas. There was no clear pattern of differences in associations across states. Among older women, relationships between accessible facilities and walking may be most important in more densely populated settings.

Identifying spatial clusters of chronic diseases has been conducted over the past several decades. More recently these approaches have been applied to physical activity and obesity. However, few studies have investigated built environment characteristics in relation to these spatial clusters. This study’s aims were to detect spatial clusters of physical activity and obesity, examine whether the geographic distribution of covariates affects clusters, and compare built environment characteristics inside and outside clusters.