Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Anesthesiology Cardiology Dermatology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology General Medicine Geriatrics Hematology Infectious Diseases Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Obstetrics and Gynecology Oncology Pediatrics Psychiatry Radiology Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery Urology
Congress Coverage
2024 ERS Congress 2024 EASD Congress 2024 ESC Congress 2024 EAN Congress 2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ERS Congress 2024

Keep up to date on the latest news from the annual European Respiratory Society conference.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Urban Health
Published in:

Open Access 18-12-2023 | Public Health | Review

How to Achieve a Healthy City: a Scoping Review with Ten City Examples

Authors: Abbas Ziafati Bafarasat, Ayyoob Sharifi

Published in: Journal of Urban Health | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

This scoping review of the literature explores the following question: what systematic measures are needed to achieve a healthy city? The World Health Organization (WHO) suggests 11 characteristics of a healthy city. Measures contributing to these characteristics are extracted and classified into 29 themes. Implementation of some of these measures is illustrated by examples from Freiburg, Greater Vancouver, Singapore, Seattle, New York City, London, Nantes, Exeter, Copenhagen, and Washington, DC. The identified measures and examples indicate that a healthy city is a system of healthy sectors. A discussion section suggests healthy directions for nine sectors in a healthy city. These sectors include transportation, housing, schools, city planning, local government, environmental management, retail, heritage, and healthcare. Future work is advised to put more focus on characteristic 5 (i.e., the meeting of basic needs for all the city's people) and characteristic 10 (i.e., public health and sick care services accessible to all) of a healthy city.
Literature
1.
2.
Hooper P, Boulange C, Arciniegas G, Foster S, Bolleter J, Pettit C. Exploring the potential for planning support systems to bridge the research-translation gap between public health and urban planning. Int J Health Geogr. 2021;20(36):1–17.
3.
Kim J, Harris-Roxas B, de Leeuw E, et al. Protocol for a meta-narrative review on research paradigms addressing the urban built environment and human health. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):1–9.CrossRef
4.
Ziafati Bafarasat A, Cheshmehzangi A, Ankowska A. A set of 99 healthy city indicators for application in urban planning and design. Sustain Dev. 2023;31(3):1978–89.CrossRef
5.
Samhita C. Concepts of health and disease. In: Patwardhan B, Mutalik G, Tillu G, editors. Integrative approaches for health: biomedical research, Ayurveda and Yoga. London: Academic Press; 2015.
6.
WHO (World Health Organization). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1948.
7.
8.
Jutte DP, Badruzzaman RA, Thomas-Squance R. Neighborhood poverty and child health: investing in communities to improve childhood opportunity and well-being. Acad Pediatr. 2021;21(8):S184–93.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Ziafati BA. Strategic urban design for sustainable development: A framework for studio and practice. Sustain Dev. 2023;31(3):1861–72.CrossRef
10.
Liu F, Chang-Richards A, Wang KK, Dirks KN. Effects of climate change on health and wellbeing: A systematic review. Sustain Dev. 2023;31(4):2067–90.CrossRef
11.
Hancock T. Healthy cities and communities: past, present, and future. Natl Civ Rev. 1997;86(1):11–21.CrossRef
12.
Hancock T, Duhl L. WHO healthy cities project: promoting health in the urban context. In: WHO Healthy Cities Papers No. 1. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1988.
13.
Hancock T. Healthy cities 2.0: transitioning towards “One Planet” cities (key challenges facing twenty-first-century cities, part 3). Cities Health. 2018;2(1):22–5.CrossRef
14.
15.
16.
17.
Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI; 2020.
18.
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32.CrossRef
20.
Colquhoun HL, Levac D, O’Brien KK, et al. Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(12):1291–4.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, et al. Chapter 11: scoping reviews. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors., et al., JBI manual for evidence synthesis. JBI; 2020. p. 406–51.
22.
23.
Sharifi A, Pathak M, Joshi C, He BJ. A systematic review of the health co-benefits of urban climate change adaptation. Sustain Cities Soc. 2021;74:103190.CrossRef
24.
Moldavska A, Welo T. The concept of sustainable manufacturing and its definitions: a content-analysis based literature review. J Clean Prod. 2017;166:744–55.CrossRef
25.
WHO. Building a healthy city: a practitioner’s guide, a step-by-step approach to implementing healthy city projects in low-income countries. WHO; 1995.
26.
Altaş NE, Özsoy A. Spatial adaptability and flexibility as parameters of user satisfaction for quality housing. Build Environ. 1998;33(5):315–23.CrossRef
27.
Carmona M. Place value: place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. J Urban Des. 2019;24(1):1–48.CrossRef
28.
29.
30.
Crowe T, Fennelly L. Crime prevention through environmental design. Oxford: Elsevier; 2013.
31.
de Goyet CDV, Marti RZ, Osorio C, et al. Natural disaster mitigation and relief. In: Jamison DT, Breman JG, Measham AR, et al., editors. Disease control priorities in developing countries. 2nd ed. World Bank Publications; 2006. p. 1147–62.
32.
Dempsey N. Quality of the built environment in urban neighbourhoods. Plan Pract Res. 2008;23(2):249–64.CrossRef
33.
Dempsey N. Are good-quality environments socially cohesive? Measuring quality and cohesion in urban neighbourhoods. Town Plan Rev. 2009;80(3):315–45.CrossRef
34.
35.
Jackson LE. The relationship of urban design to human health and condition. Landsc Urban Plan. 2003;64(4):191–200.CrossRef
36.
Kohl H III, Murray T, Salvo D. Foundations of physical activity and public health. Champaign: Human Kinetics Publishers; 2020.
37.
38.
Lawrence R, Fudge C. Healthy cities: key principles for professional practice. In: Scriven A, Garman S, editors. Public health: social context and action. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2007. p. 180–92.
39.
Lynch K. A theory of good city form. Massachusetts: The MIT Press; 1981.
40.
Otgaar AH, Klijs J, van den Berg L. Towards healthy cities: comparing conditions for change. Farnham: Ashgate; 2011.
41.
Perkins DD, Meeks JW, Taylor RB. The physical environment of street blocks and resident perceptions of crime and disorder: implications for theory and measurement. J Environ Psychol. 1992;12(1):21–34.CrossRef
42.
Sarker RI, Mailer M, Sikder SK. Walking to a public transport station: empirical evidence on willingness and acceptance in Munich, Germany. Smart Sustain Built Environ. 2020;9(1):38–53.CrossRef
43.
Smith T, Nelischer M, Perkins N. Quality of an urban community: a framework for understanding the relationship between quality and physical form. Landsc Urban Plan. 1997;39(2–3):229–41.CrossRef
44.
Turkyilmaz E, Yazici G. SAR design with IFC. In: Zarli A, Scherer R, editors. eWork and eBusiness in architecture, engineering and construction. London: CRC Press; 2008. p. 111–5.CrossRef
45.
46.
Schuetze T. Vauban and Rieselfeld, Freiburg, Germany: innovation in the implementation process. In: Darchen S, Searle G, editors. Global planning innovations for urban sustainability. London: Routledge; 2019. p. 73–89.
47.
Tsenkova S. Planning sustainable communities: diversity of approaches and implementation challenges. Calgary: Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Cities, Policy & Planning Research Series; 2009.
48.
Coates GJ. The sustainable urban district of Vauban in Freiburg, Germany. Int J Des Nat Ecodynamics. 2013;8(4):265–86.CrossRef
49.
Roberts B, Schwartz H, Carline J, et al. Global good practices in sustainable urban region development. In: Roberts B, Kanaley T, editors., et al., Urbanization and sustainability in Asia: case studies of good practice. Mandaluyong: Asian Development Bank; 2006. p. 403–35.
50.
Smith BE, Haid S. The rural-urban connection: growing together in Greater Vancouver. Plan Canada. 2004;44(1):36–9.
51.
Sussman E. Reshaping municipal and county laws to foster green building, energy efficiency, and renewable energy. NYU Environ Law J. 2008;16:1.
52.
Garrard GE, Williams NS, Mata L, et al. Biodiversity sensitive urban design. Conserv Lett. 2018;11(2):1–10.CrossRef
53.
Chan FKS, Griffiths JA, Higgitt D, Xu S, Zhu F, Tang YT, Xu Y, Thorne CR. “Sponge City” in China - a breakthrough of planning and flood risk management in the urban context. Land Use Policy. 2018;76:772–8.CrossRef
54.
McPhearson T, Andersson E, Elmqvist T, et al. Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv. 2015;12:152–6.CrossRef
55.
Fox D. Halting urban sprawl: smart growth in Vancouver and Seattle. BC Int’l Comp L Rev. 2010;33(1):43–59.
56.
Tomalty R. Growth management in the Vancouver region. Local Environ. 2002;7(4):431–45.CrossRef
57.
Hutton TA. Thinking metropolis: from the “livable region” to the “sustainable metropolis” in Vancouver. Int Plan Stud. 2011;16(3):237–55.ADSCrossRef
58.
59.
Alhusban SA, Alhusban AA, AlBetawi YN. Suggesting theoretical urban neighborhood design concept by adopting the changing discourse of social capital. J Enterprising Communities: People Places Glob Econ. 2019;13(3):391–411.CrossRef
60.
61.
Chua BH. Race relations and public housing policy in Singapore. J Archit Plan Res. 1991;8(4):343–54.
62.
Espino NA. Building the inclusive city: theory and practice for confronting urban segregation. Abingdon: Routledge; 2015.CrossRef
63.
Gopalakrishnan S, Chong KH. The prospect of community-led place-keeping as urban commons in public residential estates in Singapore. Built Environ. 2020;46(1):115–38.CrossRef
64.
Kent JL, Thompson S. The three domains of urban planning for health and well-being. J Plan Lit. 2014;29(3):239–56.CrossRef
65.
Leite C, Acosta C, Militelli F, et al. Social Urbanism in Latin America: cases and instruments of planning, land policy and financing the city transformation with social inclusion. Cham: Springer; 2020.CrossRef
66.
Low S, Taplin D, Scheld S. Rethinking urban parks: public space and cultural diversity. Austin: University of Texas Press; 2005.
67.
Lowe M, Whitzman C, Giles-Corti B. Health-promoting spatial planning: approaches for strengthening urban policy integration. Plan Theory Pract. 2018;19(2):180–97.CrossRef
68.
69.
Talen E. Design for diversity: evaluating the context of socially mixed neighbourhoods. J Urban Des. 2006;11(1):1–32.CrossRef
70.
Taylor HL Jr, McGlynn L, Luter DG. Public schools as neighborhood anchor institutions: the choice neighborhood initiative in Buffalo, New York. In: Patterson KL, Silverman RM, editors. Schools and urban revitalization: rethinking institutions and community development. Abingdon: Routledge; 2014. p. 109–35.
71.
Williams P. Inclusionary zoning and strategic planning: affordable housing case study. Aust Planner. 1997;34(1):16–21.CrossRef
72.
73.
Chua BH. Navigating between limits: the future of public housing in Singapore. Hous Stud. 2014;29(4):520–33.CrossRef
74.
Lee WO. Education for future-oriented citizenship: implications for the education of twenty-first century competencies. Asia Pac J Educ. 2012;32(4):498–517.CrossRef
75.
Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Smith P, Martin E, Gauvin FP. Deliberations about deliberation: issues in the design and evaluation of public consultation processes. Soc Sci Med. 2003;57(2):239–51.PubMedCrossRef
76.
Baker M, Coaffee J, Sherriff G. Achieving successful participation in the new UK spatial planning system. Plan Pract Res. 2007;22(1):79–93.CrossRef
77.
Dooris M, Heritage Z. Healthy cities: facilitating the active participation and empowerment of local people. J Urban Health. 2013;90(1):74–91.PubMedCrossRef
78.
Duhl LJ. The healthy city: its function and its future. Health Promot Int. 1986;1(1):55–60.CrossRef
79.
Heritage Z, Dooris M. Community participation and empowerment in healthy cities. Health Promot Int. 2009;24(suppl_1):i45–55.PubMedCrossRef
80.
81.
82.
Pratchett L. Local autonomy, local democracy and the “new localism.” Polit Stud. 2004;52(2):358–75.CrossRef
83.
Shipley R, Utz S. Making it count: a review of the value and techniques for public consultation. J Plan Lit. 2012;27(1):22–42.CrossRef
84.
85.
Sirianni C. Investing in democracy: engaging citizens in collaborative governance. Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institution Press; 2009.
86.
87.
88.
89.
Corburn J. Equitable and healthy city planning: towards healthy urban governance in the century of the city. In: De Leeuw E, Simos J, editors. Healthy cities: the theory, policy, and practice of value-based urban planning. New York: Springer; 2017. p. 31–41.CrossRef
90.
Greed CH, editor. Social town planning. London: Routledge; 1999.
91.
Kertesz SG, Crouch K, Milby JB, Cusimano RE, Schumacher JE. Housing first for homeless persons with active addiction: are we overreaching? Milbank Q. 2009;87(2):495–534.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
92.
Lovell ST. Multifunctional urban agriculture for sustainable land use planning in the United States. Sustainability. 2010;2(8):2499–522.CrossRef
93.
94.
Paül V, McKenzie FH. Peri-urban farmland conservation and development of alternative food networks: insights from a case-study area in metropolitan Barcelona (Catalonia, Spain). Land Use Policy. 2013;30(1):94–105.CrossRef
95.
Quon S. Planning for urban agriculture: a review of tools and strategies for urban planners. Cities Feeding People Series, Report 28, International Development Research Centre; 1999.
96.
Roever S, Skinner C. Street vendors and cities. Environ Urban. 2016;28(2):359–74.CrossRef
97.
Tainio H, Fredriksson P. The Finnish homelessness strategy: from a “staircase” model to a “housing first” approach to tackling long-term homelessness. Eur J Homelessness. 2009;3:181–99.
98.
Bloom ND. Public housing that worked: new York in the twentieth century. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2008.CrossRef
99.
Tsemberis S, Eisenberg RF. Pathways to housing: supported housing for street-dwelling homeless individuals with psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Serv. 2000;51(4):487–93.PubMedCrossRef
100.
101.
Foster SR, Iaione C. Ostrom in the city: design principles and practices for the urban commons. In: Hudson B, Rosenbloom J, Cole D, editors. Routledge handbook of the study of the commons. Abingdon: Routledge; 2019. p. 235–55.CrossRef
102.
Gehl J. Life between buildings using public space. Washington: Island Press; 2011.
103.
Green J, Jones A, Roberts H. More than A to B: the role of free bus travel for the mobility and wellbeing of older citizens in London. Ageing Soc. 2014;34(3):472–94.PubMedCrossRef
104.
Jonas MC. Private use of public open space in Tokyo A study of the hybrid landscape of Tokyo’s informal gardens. J Landsc Archit. 2007;2(2):18–29.CrossRef
105.
106.
Low WY, Cao M, De Vos J, Hickman R. The journey experience of visually impaired people on public transport in London. Transp Policy. 2020;97:137–48.CrossRef
107.
Lucas R, Romice O. Representing sensory experience in urban design. Des Princ Pract. 2008;2(4):83–94.
108.
Moreno C, Allam Z, Chabaud D, et al. Introducing the “15-Minute City”: sustainability, resilience and place identity in future post-pandemic cities. Smart Cities. 2021;4(1):93–111.CrossRef
109.
Rohra H, Mann J, Rommerskirch-Manietta M, et al. Wayfinding and urban design from the perspective of people living with dementia – a call for participatory research. J Urban Des Mental Health. 2021;7(4):1–18.
110.
Talen E. Help for urban planning: the transect strategy. J Urban Des. 2002;7(3):293–312.CrossRef
111.
Wu C, Smith D, Wang M. Simulating the urban spatial structure with spatial interaction: a case study of urban polycentricity under different scenarios. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 2021;89:101.CrossRef
112.
GLA (Greater London Authority). The London Plan: spatial development strategy for greater London March 2021. London: GLA; 2021.
113.
114.
115.
Harris M, Holley K. Universities as anchor institutions: economic and social potential for urban development. In: Paulsen M, editor. Higher education: handbook of theory and research (Volume 31). Cham: Springer; 2016. p. 393–439.CrossRef
116.
117.
118.
Pancholi S, Yigitcanlar T, Guaralda M. Public space design of knowledge and innovation spaces: learnings from Kelvin Grove Urban Village, Brisbane. J Open Innov: Technol Mark Complex. 2015;1(1):13.CrossRef
119.
Sutton SA. Rethinking commercial revitalization: a neighborhood small business perspective. Econ Dev Q. 2010;24(4):352–71.CrossRef
120.
Wang J, Tong C, Hu X. Policy zoning method for innovation districts to sustainably develop the knowledge-economy: a case study in Hangzhou, China. Sustainability. 2021;13(6):3503.CrossRef
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
Brown C, Grant M. Biodiversity and human health: what role for nature in healthy urban planning? Built Environment. 2005;31(4):326–38.CrossRef
127.
128.
Janssen J, Luiten E, Renes H, et al. Heritage planning and spatial development in the Netherlands: changing policies and perspectives. Int J Herit Stud. 2014;20(1):1–21.CrossRef
129.
La Frenierre J. Mapping heritage: a participatory technique for identifying tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Int J Incl Mus. 2008;1(1):97–104.
130.
131.
Montgomery J. Cultural quarters as mechanisms for urban regeneration. Part 1: Conceptualising cultural quarters. Plan Pract Res. 2003;18(4):293–306.CrossRef
132.
Mosler S. Everyday heritage concept as an approach to place-making process in the urban landscape. J Urban Des. 2019;24(5):778–93.CrossRef
133.
Robertson KA. Downtown redevelopment strategies in the United States: an end-of-the-century assessment. J Am Plann Assoc. 1995;61(4):429–37.CrossRef
134.
Wansborough M, Mageean A. The role of urban design in cultural regeneration. J Urban Des. 2000;5(2):181–97.CrossRef
135.
While A, Tait M. Exeter and the question of Thomas Sharp’s physical legacy. Plan Perspect. 2009;24(1):77–97.CrossRef
136.
137.
Gallent N, Bianconi M, Andersson J. Planning on the edge: england’s rural-urban fringe and the spatial-planning agenda. Environ Plann B Plann Des. 2006;33(3):457–76.CrossRef
138.
Giles-Corti B, Vernez-Moudon A, Reis R, et al. City planning and population health: a global challenge. The Lancet. 2016;388(10062):2912–24.CrossRef
139.
Hankey S, Marshall JD. Urban form, air pollution, and health. Curr Environ Health Rep. 2017;4(4):491–503.PubMedCrossRef
140.
Kotulla T, Denstadli JM, Oust A, Beusker E. What does it take to make the compact city liveable for wider groups? Identifying key neighbourhood and dwelling features. Sustainability. 2019;11(12):3480.CrossRef
141.
McCarthy D, Saegert S. Residential density, social overload, and social withdrawal. Hum Ecol. 1978;6(3):253–72.CrossRef
142.
Ridderström G. Helse som premiss for byplanlegging [Health as premise for urban planning]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2020;119(30):4530–4.
143.
Sallis JF, Bull F, Burdett R, et al. Use of science to guide city planning policy and practice: how to achieve healthy and sustainable future cities. Lancet. 2016;388(10062):2936–47.PubMedCrossRef
144.
Sørensen E, Torfing J. The Copenhagen Metropolitan “Finger Plan”: a robust urban planning success based on collaborative governance. In: Compton ME, Hart PT, editors. Great policy successes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019. p. 218–43.CrossRef
145.
Stevenson M, Thompson J, de Sá TH, et al. Land use, transport, and population health: estimating the health benefits of compact cities. The Lancet. 2016;388(10062):2925–35.CrossRef
146.
Li HR. Study on green transportation system of international metropolises. Procedia Eng. 2016;137:762–71.CrossRef
147.
Brüel M. Copenhagen, Denmark: green City amid the finger metropolis. In: Beatley T, editor. Green Cities of Europe: global lessons on green urbanism. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2012. p. 83–108.CrossRef
148.
Bissonnette L, Wilson K, Bell S, Shah TI. Neighbourhoods and potential access to healthcare: the role of spatial and aspatial factors. Health Place. 2012;18(4):841–53.PubMedCrossRef
149.
Corburn J, Bhatia R. Health impact assessment in San Francisco: incorporating the social determinants of health into environmental planning. J Environ Planning Manage. 2007;50(3):323–41.CrossRef
150.
Corburn J. Toward the healthy city: people, places, and the politics of urban planning. Massachusetts: MIT Press; 2009.CrossRef
151.
Coulter A. Engaging communities for health improvement. London: The Health Foundation; 2010.
152.
Crawford J. Health at the heart of spatial planning. Plan Theory Pract. 2010;11(1):91–4.CrossRef
153.
Davies L. Planning for disability: barrier-free living. In: Greed CH, editor. Social town planning. London: Routledge; 1999. p. 74–89.
154.
Guagliardo MF. Spatial accessibility of primary care: concepts, methods and challenges. Int J Health Geogr. 2004;3(1):1–13.CrossRef
155.
Holguín JM, Escobar DA, Moncada CA. Access to emergency medical services: an urban planning methodology for the generation of equity. Global J Health Sci. 2018;10(6):181–98.CrossRef
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
Kanters J, Horvat M. Solar energy as a design parameter in urban planning. Energy Procedia. 2012;30:1143–52.CrossRef
164.
Leduc WR, Van Kann FM. Spatial planning based on urban energy harvesting toward productive urban regions. J Clean Prod. 2013;39:180–90.CrossRef
165.
Yigitcanlar T, Dizdaroglu D. Ecological approaches in planning for sustainable cities: A review of the literature. Glob J Environ Sci Manag. 2015;1(2):159–88.
166.
Grêt-Regamey A, Altwegg J, Sirén EA, Van Strien MJ, Weibel B. Integrating ecosystem services into spatial planning - a spatial decision support tool. Landsc Urban Plan. 2017;165:206–19.CrossRef
167.
Scott A, Carter C, Hardman M, Grayson N, Slaney T. Mainstreaming ecosystem science in spatial planning practice: Exploiting a hybrid opportunity space. Land Use Policy. 2018;70:232–46.CrossRef
168.
Carmichael L, Barton H, Gray S, Lease H, Pilkington P. Integration of health into urban spatial planning through impact assessment: identifying governance and policy barriers and facilitators. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2012;32(1):187–94.CrossRef
169.
Green J, Jones A, Roberts H. More than A to B: the role of free bus travel for the mobility and wellbeing of older citizens in London. Ageing & Soc. 2014;34(3):472–94.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
How to Achieve a Healthy City: a Scoping Review with Ten City Examples
Authors
Abbas Ziafati Bafarasat
Ayyoob Sharifi
Publication date
18-12-2023
Publisher
Springer US
Keyword
Public Health
Published in
Journal of Urban Health / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1099-3460
Electronic ISSN: 1468-2869
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-023-00798-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Journal of Urban Health 1/2024 Go to the issue

Review

Systematic Review of Neighborhood Factors Impacting HIV Care Continuum Participation in the United States

Original Article

Urban Teen Perspectives on Gun Violence: a Mixed Methods Study

News

2023 Reviewer List

Original Article

Elevations in Blood Pressure Associated with Exposure to Violence are Mitigated by Pro-gun-Carrying Attitudes among Street-Identified Black Males and Females

Original Article

Income Loss and Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States—Investigating the Moderating Role of Race and Metro-Level Co-ethnic Density

Brief Report

A Comparison of Three Area-Level Indices of Neighborhood Deprivation and Socioeconomic Status and their Applicability to Breast Cancer Mortality