在塔斯马尼亚试行公民科学方法来审计农村的步行性。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Health Promotion Journal of Australia Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1002/hpja.936
Kim Jose, Samantha Rowbotham, Yvonne Laird, Oliver Stanesby, Leah Marks, Kate Garvey, Verity Cleland
{"title":"在塔斯马尼亚试行公民科学方法来审计农村的步行性。","authors":"Kim Jose,&nbsp;Samantha Rowbotham,&nbsp;Yvonne Laird,&nbsp;Oliver Stanesby,&nbsp;Leah Marks,&nbsp;Kate Garvey,&nbsp;Verity Cleland","doi":"10.1002/hpja.936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>People living in ‘walkable’ areas are more active, but common approaches to assessing walkability using audit tools and geospatial data have limitations in rural areas. This project explored the feasibility, acceptability and benefits of using a citizen science approach to audit walkability in rural communities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Using a citizen science approach, community members in rural towns completed audit tools and photographs to capture walkability. Researchers collated data and facilitated workshops with community members to identify priorities for action. The feasibility of applying a citizen science approach was evaluated through surveys and interviews with citizen scientists and project team members.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Three rural Australian towns (population 300; 850; 2890) were included, with a total of 10 community members (1–6 per town) completing audits and 13 (4–9 per town) attending workshops. It was feasible for citizen scientists to complete audits to identify environmental and physical attributes and impediments to walking. It was less feasible for citizen scientists to audit local policies and programs. Workshops enabled a broader and deeper understanding of the data, and represent a crucial aspect of the citizen science process. Citizen scientists were motivated by a desire to improve their community. Lack of diversity among citizen scientists, safety and recruitment were limitations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion/Discussion</h3>\n \n <p>Citizen science was a feasible and acceptable approach for auditing rural walkability, generating a rich and deep understanding of how the built environment impacts walking. Citizen science allows researchers, policy makers and community members to work together to generate data and establish priorities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> So What?</h3>\n \n <p>Citizen science has the potential to support the involvement of members of the public in research and decision-making in health promotion. Researchers need to adopt strategies to ensure diversity among citizen scientists as well as consider the support needs of citizen scientists when adopting this approach.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47379,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Journal of Australia","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Piloting a citizen science approach to auditing rural walkability in Tasmania\",\"authors\":\"Kim Jose,&nbsp;Samantha Rowbotham,&nbsp;Yvonne Laird,&nbsp;Oliver Stanesby,&nbsp;Leah Marks,&nbsp;Kate Garvey,&nbsp;Verity Cleland\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hpja.936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>People living in ‘walkable’ areas are more active, but common approaches to assessing walkability using audit tools and geospatial data have limitations in rural areas. This project explored the feasibility, acceptability and benefits of using a citizen science approach to audit walkability in rural communities.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Using a citizen science approach, community members in rural towns completed audit tools and photographs to capture walkability. Researchers collated data and facilitated workshops with community members to identify priorities for action. The feasibility of applying a citizen science approach was evaluated through surveys and interviews with citizen scientists and project team members.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Three rural Australian towns (population 300; 850; 2890) were included, with a total of 10 community members (1–6 per town) completing audits and 13 (4–9 per town) attending workshops. It was feasible for citizen scientists to complete audits to identify environmental and physical attributes and impediments to walking. It was less feasible for citizen scientists to audit local policies and programs. Workshops enabled a broader and deeper understanding of the data, and represent a crucial aspect of the citizen science process. Citizen scientists were motivated by a desire to improve their community. Lack of diversity among citizen scientists, safety and recruitment were limitations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion/Discussion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Citizen science was a feasible and acceptable approach for auditing rural walkability, generating a rich and deep understanding of how the built environment impacts walking. Citizen science allows researchers, policy makers and community members to work together to generate data and establish priorities.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> So What?</h3>\\n \\n <p>Citizen science has the potential to support the involvement of members of the public in research and decision-making in health promotion. Researchers need to adopt strategies to ensure diversity among citizen scientists as well as consider the support needs of citizen scientists when adopting this approach.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Promotion Journal of Australia\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Promotion Journal of Australia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hpja.936\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hpja.936","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:生活在“可步行”地区的人们更活跃,但使用审计工具和地理空间数据评估可步行性的常用方法在农村地区存在局限性。本项目探讨了使用公民科学方法审核农村社区可步行性的可行性、可接受性和效益。方法:采用公民科学方法,在农村城镇社区成员完成审计工具和照片,以捕捉步行性。研究人员整理了数据,并为社区成员举办了研讨会,以确定行动的优先事项。通过对公民科学家和项目团队成员的调查和访谈,评估了应用公民科学方法的可行性。结果:三个澳大利亚农村城镇(人口300;850年;共有10名社区成员(每个镇1-6人)完成审计,13名社区成员(每个镇4-9人)参加研讨会。公民科学家完成审计以确定环境和物理属性以及行走障碍是可行的。公民科学家审核地方政策和项目是不太可行的。讲习班使人们能够更广泛、更深入地了解数据,并代表了公民科学进程的一个关键方面。公民科学家的动机是想要改善他们的社区。公民科学家缺乏多样性、安全性和招聘是限制因素。结论/讨论:公民科学是一种可行和可接受的方法来审计农村步行性,对建筑环境如何影响步行产生丰富而深刻的理解。公民科学允许研究人员、政策制定者和社区成员共同工作,生成数据并确定优先事项。那又怎样?公民科学具有支持公众成员参与健康促进研究和决策的潜力。科学家需要采取策略来确保公民科学家的多样性,并在采用这种方法时考虑公民科学家的支持需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Piloting a citizen science approach to auditing rural walkability in Tasmania

Background

People living in ‘walkable’ areas are more active, but common approaches to assessing walkability using audit tools and geospatial data have limitations in rural areas. This project explored the feasibility, acceptability and benefits of using a citizen science approach to audit walkability in rural communities.

Methods

Using a citizen science approach, community members in rural towns completed audit tools and photographs to capture walkability. Researchers collated data and facilitated workshops with community members to identify priorities for action. The feasibility of applying a citizen science approach was evaluated through surveys and interviews with citizen scientists and project team members.

Results

Three rural Australian towns (population 300; 850; 2890) were included, with a total of 10 community members (1–6 per town) completing audits and 13 (4–9 per town) attending workshops. It was feasible for citizen scientists to complete audits to identify environmental and physical attributes and impediments to walking. It was less feasible for citizen scientists to audit local policies and programs. Workshops enabled a broader and deeper understanding of the data, and represent a crucial aspect of the citizen science process. Citizen scientists were motivated by a desire to improve their community. Lack of diversity among citizen scientists, safety and recruitment were limitations.

Conclusion/Discussion

Citizen science was a feasible and acceptable approach for auditing rural walkability, generating a rich and deep understanding of how the built environment impacts walking. Citizen science allows researchers, policy makers and community members to work together to generate data and establish priorities.

So What?

Citizen science has the potential to support the involvement of members of the public in research and decision-making in health promotion. Researchers need to adopt strategies to ensure diversity among citizen scientists as well as consider the support needs of citizen scientists when adopting this approach.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health Promotion Journal of Australia
Health Promotion Journal of Australia PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.50%
发文量
115
期刊介绍: The purpose of the Health Promotion Journal of Australia is to facilitate communication between researchers, practitioners, and policymakers involved in health promotion activities. Preference for publication is given to practical examples of policies, theories, strategies and programs which utilise educational, organisational, economic and/or environmental approaches to health promotion. The journal also publishes brief reports discussing programs, professional viewpoints, and guidelines for practice or evaluation methodology. The journal features articles, brief reports, editorials, perspectives, "of interest", viewpoints, book reviews and letters.
期刊最新文献
An anti-junk food ad from a sports commercial break reduced junk food consumption inclinations, yet junk food ads had minimal to no impact. Osteoporosis screening in Australian community pharmacies: A mixed methods study. Co-design of digital public health substance use resources: A collaboration between young people and experts. Health literacy profiles of final year pre-service teachers in two initial education programs compared with the general population: A cross-sectional study using the Health Literacy Questionnaire. Free bus fares, bus use and physical activity: An exploratory cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1