Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Enhancing safe routes to school programs through community-engaged citizen science: two pilot investigations in lower density areas of Santa Clara County, California, USA

Authors: Nicole M. Rodriguez, Alisa Arce, Alice Kawaguchi, Jenna Hua, Bonnie Broderick, Sandra J. Winter, Abby C. King

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While promoting active commuting to school can positively affect children’s daily physical activity levels, effectively engaging community members to maximize program impact remains challenging. We evaluated the initial utility of adding a technology-enabled citizen science engagement model, called Our Voice, to a standard Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program to enhance program engagement activities and student travel mode behavior.

Methods

In Investigation 1, a prospective controlled comparison design was used to compare the initial year of the Santa Clara County Public Health Department’s SRTS program, with and without the Our Voice engagement model added, in two elementary schools in Gilroy, California, USA. School parents served as Our Voice citizen scientists in the SRTS + Our Voice school. In Investigation 2, the feasibility of the combined SRTS + Our Voice methods was evaluated in a middle school in the same district using students, rather than adults, as citizen scientists. Standard SRTS program engagement measures and student travel mode tallies were collected at the beginning and end of the school year for each school.

Results

In the elementary school investigation (Investigation 1), the SRTS + Our Voice elementary school held twice as many first-year SRTS planning/encouragement events compared to the SRTS-Alone elementary school, and between-school changes in walking/biking to school rates favored the SRTS + Our Voice school (increases of 24.5% vs. 2.6%, P < .001). The Investigation 2 results supported the feasibility of using students to conduct SRTS + Our Voice in a middle school-age population.

Conclusions

The findings from this first-generation study indicated that adding a technology-enabled citizen science process to a standard elementary school SRTS program was associated with higher levels of community engagement and walking/biking to school compared to SRTS alone. The approach was also found to be acceptable and feasible in a middle school setting.
Literature
1.
Kohl HW, Cook HD. Educating the student body: taking physical activity and physical education to school. Washington, DC: food and nutrition board, institute of Medicine; 2013.
2.
McDonald NC. Active transportation to school: trends among U.S. schoolchildren, 1969-2001. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(6):509–16.CrossRef
3.
4.
Lee MC, Orenstein MR, Richardson MJ. Systematic review of active commuting to school and childrens physical activity and weight. J Phys Act Health. 2008;5(6):930–49.CrossRef
5.
McDonald N. Impact of safe routes to school programs on walking and biking. In: . San Diego, CA: Active living research: Active Living Research. p. 2015.
6.
McDonald NC, Steiner RL, Lee C, Rhoulac ST, Zhu X, Yang Y. Impact of the safe routes to school program on walking and bicycling. J Am Planning Assoc. 2014;80(2):153–67.CrossRef
7.
Stewart O, Moudon AV, Claybrooke C. Multistate evaluation of safe routes to school programs. Am J Health Promot. 2014;28(3 Suppl):S89–96.CrossRef
8.
9.
Macridis S, Bengoechea EG. Adoption of safe routes to school in Canadian and the United States contexts: best practices and recommendations. J Sch Health. 2015.
10.
McDonald NC, Steiner RL, Palmer WM, Bullock AN, Sisiopiku VP, Lytle BF. Costs of school transportation: quantifying the fiscal impacts of encouraging walking and bicycling for school travel. Transportation. 2016;43(1):159–75.CrossRef
11.
King AC, Winter SJ, Sheats JL, Rosas LG, Buman MP, Salvo D, Rodriguez NM, Seguin RA, Moran M, Garber R, et al. Leveraging citizen science and information technology for population physical activity promotion. Translat J ACSM. 2016;1(4):30–44.
12.
Buman MP, Winter SJ, Sheats JL, Hekler EB, Otten JJ, Grieco LA, King AC. The Stanford healthy neighborhood discovery tool: a computerized tool to assess active living environments. Am J Prev Med. 2013;44(4):e41–7.CrossRef
13.
Buman MP, Winter SJ, Baker C, Hekler EB, Otten JJ, King AC. Neighborhood eating and activity advocacy teams (NEAAT): engaging older adults in policy activities to improve food and physical environments. Transl Behav Med. 2012;2(2):249–53.CrossRef
14.
Seguin RA, Morgan EH, Connor LM, Garner JA, King AC, Sheats JL, Winter SJ, Buman MP. Rural food and physical activity assessment using an electronic tablet-based application, New York, 2013-2014. Prev Chronic Dis. 2015;12:E102.CrossRef
15.
Hinckson E, Schneider M, Winter SJ, Stone E, Puhan M, Stathi A, Porter MM, Gardiner PA, Dos Santos DL, Wolff A, et al. Citizen science applied to building healthier community environments: advancing the field through shared construct and measurement development. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):133.CrossRef
16.
Rosas LG, Salvo D, Winter SJ, Cortes D, Rivera J, Rodriguez NM, King AC. Harnessing technology and citizen science to support neighborhoods that promote active living in Mexico. J Urban Health. 2016;93(6):953–73.CrossRef
17.
Winter SJ, Goldman Rosas L, Padilla Romero P, Sheats JL, Buman MP, Baker C, King AC. Using citizen scientists to gather, analyze, and disseminate information about neighborhood features that affect active living. J Immigr Minor Health. 2015.
18.
Sheats JL, Winter SJ, Romero PP, King AC. FEAST: empowering community residents to use technology to assess and advocate for healthy food environments. J Urban Health. 2017;94(2):180–9.CrossRef
19.
Moran MR, Werner P, Doron I, HaGani N, Benvenisti Y, King AC, Winter SJ, Sheats JL, Garber R, Motro H, et al. Exploring the objective and perceived environmental attributes of older adults' neighborhood walking routes: a mixed methods analysis. J Aging Phys Act. 2016:1–36.
20.
International Affairs Office. Organization of U.S. education: the school level. Washington, DC: U.S. Network for education information, U.S. department of Education; 2008.
21.
U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Census 2015. In. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau; 2015.
22.
Census Bureau US. 2010 Census and 2010–2014 American community survey 5-year estimates. In. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau; 2010.
23.
24.
Corman E, Kawaguchi A, Pollet I, Swent R, Veitch T, Ward S: Safe routes to school coordinator manual: A How-to guide for promoting walking and rolling at your school. In. Edited by Network TSC. Santa Jose, CA: Santa Clara County Public Health Department; 2014.
25.
26.
Stock JH, Watson MW. Introduction to econometrics. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley; 2007.
27.
StataCorp: Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX: StataCorpLLC; 2017.
28.
Chen P, Jiao J, Xu M, Gao X, Bischak C. Promoting active student travel: a longitudinal study. J Transport Geography. 2018;70:265–74.CrossRef
29.
McDonald NC. Critical factors for active transportation to school among low-income and minority students. Evidence from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34(4):341–4.CrossRef
30.
Zhu X, Lee C. Walkability and safety around elementary schools economic and ethnic disparities. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34(4):282–90.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Enhancing safe routes to school programs through community-engaged citizen science: two pilot investigations in lower density areas of Santa Clara County, California, USA
Authors
Nicole M. Rodriguez
Alisa Arce
Alice Kawaguchi
Jenna Hua
Bonnie Broderick
Sandra J. Winter
Abby C. King
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6563-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Public Health 1/2019 Go to the issue

Research article

Health as an independent predictor of the 2017 French presidential voting behaviour: a cross-sectional analysis

Research article

Home gardens as a predictor of enhanced dietary diversity and food security in rural Myanmar

Study protocol

Integrating physical activity into the primary school curriculum: rationale and study protocol for the “Thinking while Moving in English” cluster randomized controlled trial

Research article

Factors determining choice of place of delivery: analytical cross-sectional study of mothers in Akordet town, Eritrea

Research article

Effect of a participatory organizational workplace intervention on workplace social capital: post-hoc results from a cluster randomized controlled trial

Study protocol

A study protocol for a randomised controlled trial evaluating the use of information communication technology (WhatsApp/WeChat) to deliver brief motivational interviewing (i-BMI) in promoting smoking cessation among smokers with chronic diseases