Environments favorable to healthy lifestyles: A systematic review of initiatives in Canada

Abstract

BackgroundIn recent years, a number of initiatives aimed at promoting healthy lifestyles in health-friendly environments have been implemented. The purpose of this review is to synthesize initiatives conducted in Canada and documented in publications for the period 1995–2015 in order to gain a better understanding of their objectives and impacts.MethodsA systematic review of Canadian initiatives published over the past 20 years was conducted from multiple databases (i.e., Scopus, SPORTDiscus, PubMed, Academic search complete, Reseausante.com, Cairn, and Erudit). In total, 264 publications were identified and retained for the final analysis based on 5 criteria: (1) publication between 1995 and 2015, (2) online availability, (3) research conducted in Canada, (4) main topic related to environments favorable to healthy lifestyles (EFHL), and (5) publication in French or English.ResultsA sharp increase in the number of studies on EFHL was observed between 2010 and 2015 (57%). Two major lifestyle components—physical activity and nutrition—and 2 environmental aspects—neighborhood and built environment—were the elements most frequently examined regarding adults (48%), young people (34%), and seniors (9%), using quantitative (60%) and qualitative (18%) methods. Furthermore, the analysis reveals a greater focus on the municipal (53%) than the national or provincial levels (31%).ConclusionThis work is a first map of Canadian studies related to EFHL. It clarifies the definition of EFHL and classifies its components. As well, it documents the issues raised, the research methods employed, and the role of stakeholders, while outlining a new research agenda that includes dimensions of EFHL formerly neglected by researchers, namely, political and sociocultural spheres of action.

Impact of the Built Environment and the Neighborhood in Promoting the Physical Activity and the Healthy Aging in Older People: An Umbrella Review

“…Almost all of the studies met all of the PICOT criteria, even if there were some exceptions. Among the exceptions, only 9% of the included studies referred to older adults in the work of Gadais et al (2018) [ 31 ] and only six studies out of 27 in Cunningham and Michael (2004) [ 28 ]. Won et al (2016) [ 32 ] considered only neighborhood safety as influencing both health behaviors, such as physical activity and walking, and health outcomes, such as health status, mental health, physical function, and morbidity/mortality, which were excluded from our analysis that considered 16 out of 32 articles; Levasseur et al (2015) [ 30 ] also considered social participation and only 39 out of 50 were focused on mobility; Yen et al (2009) [ 33 ] considered various health outcomes, including mental health, health behaviors, morbidity and mortality, so only 7 out of 33 included studies analyzed physical activity as the outcome.…”

“…The other authors use different categories to classify the elements of the built environment, splitting out the features of the physical environment in Land-use patterns, Urban design characteristics and Transportation systems [ 31 ], not categorizing the elements [ 29 ] or considering only safety domains of the neighborhood [ 32 ]. Levasseur et al (2015) [ 30 ] analyzed, organized and synthesized data according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), which classifies the features of the environment into five domains: Products and technology; Natural environment and human-made changes to environment; Support and relationship, Attitudes and Services, systems and policies.…”

“…Cerin et al (2017) [ 20 ] focused on active travel (AT): total walking for transport, within-neighborhood walking for transport, combined walking and cycling for transport, cycling for transport, and all AT outcomes combined. Gadais et al (2018) [ 31 ] analyzed, as outcomes, physical activity and active travel. Won et al (2016) [ 32 ] considered physical activity and walking.…”

“…According to the analysis, we focused our attention on considering, as environmental moderator, the influence of some specific environmental definition: the country or continent of investigation, the setting intended as urban or local area and the neighborhood definition. The majority of studies included in the reviews are located in developed countries, especially in North America, which represent the only geographical area of interest for many reviews [ 28 , 31 , 32 ] and where the majority of studies, between 40% to 86%, are placed in the other reviews. The second most diffuse continent is Europe, generally representing around 20% of the studies and reaching its maximum at 35% in Moran et al [ 35 ].…”

Analysis of Social Networking Service Data for Smart Urban Planning

“…In this case, the social networks provide useful information to make decisions on this issue. Two major lifestyle components are physical activity and nutrition [77]. Moreover, the connection between doing sport and living a healthy lifestyle is unquestionable.…”