Abstract
Citation
Clifton KJ, Smith ADL, Rodriguez D. The development and testing of an audit for the pedestrian environment. Landsc Urban Plan 2007;80(1-2):95-110.
Abstract source: sciencedirect.com
Recognizing the need for consistent, reliable, and efficient methods to collect information about the walking environment, the authors have developed and tested a complete environmental audit methodology—the Pedestrian Environmental Data Scan (PEDS). In this paper, the development of the audit methodology is presented, including the design of the instrument, the creation of training and supporting materials, administration, and integration with handheld technology. Various tests of inter- and intra-rater reliability of our instrument have been conducted, including individual audit measures and various approaches to administering the audit. The results indicate high reliability for most measures and confirmed administration procedures. The PEDS audit methodology provides a comprehensive method to evaluate pedestrian environments for academics involved with transportation and physical activity research as well as practitioners seeking to an assessment tool for prioritizing investments.
Full Text
not available
At A Glance
Physical Activity Environment Variables
| # | Type of Environment/Location |
|---|---|
| 1 | Total Environments/Locations |
| 1 | Community/Neighborhood as a Whole |
| # | Scale |
|---|---|
| 995 | Segment |
| Measure | objective | perceived |
|---|---|---|
| Street Connectivity | ✔ | ✘ |
| Pedestrian/Traffic Safety | ✔ | ✔ |
| Facility Adequacy/Appeal or Quality | ✔ | ✘ |
| Aesthetics/Beautification | ✔ | ✔ |
| Land Use | ✔ | ✘ |
| Pedestrian Infrastructure | ✔ | ✘ |
| Cycling Infrastructure | ✔ | ✘ |
Domain(s)
Physical Activity Environment
Measure Type
Environmental observation
Measure Availability
Measure included in article
Download measure from planningandactivity.unc.edu
Number of Items
40 Reported
Study location
Metro/Urban
College Park, MD, USA
Languages
English
Information about Development of Measure
Tested rating in pairs, in waves (of expert raters looking at a specific topic), and individually. Rating in pairs was most reliable (inter-rater).
Study Design
Study Participants
Age
Not applicable
Sex
Not applicable
Race/Ethnicity
Not reported
Predominantly Low-income/Low-SES
No
Sample Size
Not Available
Study Design
Design Type
Validation/Reliability
Health Outcomes Assessed
None
Obesity Measures
Not applicable
BMI Measured or Self-reported
Not applicable
Covariates
Not reported
Data Reported on Race/Ethnicity
Not applicable
Data Reported on SES
Quantitative data on study sample
SES-related Variables
Education
How To Use
Administration
Who Administered
Researcher-administered
How Administered
Direct observation, PC/PDA/GPS unit
Time Required
3-5 min / 400 ft seg
Training Required
Yes, time reported: 2 days
Instructions on Use
Access at Planning and Physical Activity
Data Analysis
Data Collection/Analysis Costs
PDA costs = $100 - $200 each Software costs = $50
Data Collection/Protocol
Not available
Instructions on Data Analysis
Not reported
Validity (0)
There are no validity tests reported for this measure.
Reliability (1)
| Type of reliability | Construct/subscale assessed | Test/statistic used | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inter-rater | 4 subjective measures, 31 objective measures | Kappa statistics Range % agreement | 0.085 - 1.0 (See comments for summary) 89% of measure had > 80% agreement |