Preventive medicine · 2025
Temporary urban environment changes to promote physical activity in urban populations: A scoping review.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lei Jian, Fitzsimons Claire, Murphy Marie, Niven Ailsa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To examine what is known about the role of Temporary Urban Environment Changes (TUECs) in promoting physical activity in urban contexts.
METHODS: We conducted a scoping review in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. We systematically searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO, with screening and selection based on predefined criteria. Searches were completed in September 2024.
RESULTS: Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, mostly published after 2019 and set in high- income countries (primarily the United States and Europe). Five TUECs categories were identified: Open/Play Streets and Ciclovía, pop-up cycle lanes, pop-up parks, parklets/plazas, and other. Walking and cycling were the most frequently supported activities; 38 studies reported a beneficial direction of effect on physical activity and 4 were inconclusive. The evidence base is dominated by observational or cross-sectional designs, with inconsistent theoretical framing and heterogeneous physical-activity measures (mostly self-report or on-site observation, with few device-based measures). Equity dimensions, including reach among inactive groups, deprivation, disability and age, were rarely examined.
CONCLUSION: TUECs offer a flexible and increasingly relevant approach to supporting physical activity in urban environments. This review consolidates a fragmented evidence base and proposes a coherent lens for understanding how temporary spatial interventions are conceptualised, operationalised, and evaluated. As urban areas seek scalable, health-oriented solutions, TUECs deserve closer attention-not as isolated experiments, but as strategic tools within broader public health and urban planning agendas.
METHODS: We conducted a scoping review in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. We systematically searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO, with screening and selection based on predefined criteria. Searches were completed in September 2024.
RESULTS: Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, mostly published after 2019 and set in high- income countries (primarily the United States and Europe). Five TUECs categories were identified: Open/Play Streets and Ciclovía, pop-up cycle lanes, pop-up parks, parklets/plazas, and other. Walking and cycling were the most frequently supported activities; 38 studies reported a beneficial direction of effect on physical activity and 4 were inconclusive. The evidence base is dominated by observational or cross-sectional designs, with inconsistent theoretical framing and heterogeneous physical-activity measures (mostly self-report or on-site observation, with few device-based measures). Equity dimensions, including reach among inactive groups, deprivation, disability and age, were rarely examined.
CONCLUSION: TUECs offer a flexible and increasingly relevant approach to supporting physical activity in urban environments. This review consolidates a fragmented evidence base and proposes a coherent lens for understanding how temporary spatial interventions are conceptualised, operationalised, and evaluated. As urban areas seek scalable, health-oriented solutions, TUECs deserve closer attention-not as isolated experiments, but as strategic tools within broader public health and urban planning agendas.