The Effects of Park Based Interventions on Health: The Italian Project “Moving Parks”
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Project
2.2. Questionnaire
2.3. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Sample Size
3.2. Questionnaire
3.3. Participant Characteristics
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
- ⯀
- VELODROMO PARK
- ⯀
- LUNETTA GAMBERINI PARK
- ⯀
- NICHOLAS GREEN PARK
- ⯀
- CEDRI PARK
- ⯀
- SAN DONNINO PARK
- ⯀
- VILLA ANGELETTI PARK
References
- Rising Rural Body-Mass Index Is the Main Driver of the Global Obesity Epidemic in Adults, Nature. Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1171-x (accessed on 9 December 2021).
- DiBonaventura, M.; Nicolucci, A.; Meincke, H.; Lay, A.L.; Fournier, J. Obesity in Germany and Italy: Prevalence, Comorbidities, and Associations with Patient Outcomes. Clinicoecon. Outcomes Res. 2018, 10, 457–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pi-Sunyer, X. The Medical Risks of Obesity. Postgrad. Med. 2009, 121, 21–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jq, P. Definitions, Classification, and Epidemiology of Obesity. Available online: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25905390/ (accessed on 9 December 2021).
- The Incidence of Co-Morbidities Related to Obesity and Overweight: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, BMC Public Health. Available online: https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-9-88 (accessed on 9 December 2021).
- Nyberg, S.T.; Batty, G.D.; Pentti, J.; Virtanen, M.; Alfredsson, L.; Fransson, E.I.; Goldberg, M.; Heikkilä, K.; Jokela, M.; Knutsson, A.; et al. Obesity and Loss of Disease-Free Years Owing to Major Non-Communicable Diseases: A Multicohort Study. Lancet Public Health 2018, 3, e490–e497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jehan, F.; Nisar, I.; Kerai, S.; Balouch, B.; Brown, N.; Rahman, N.; Rizvi, A.; Shafiq, Y.; Zaidi, A.K.M. Randomized Trial of Amoxicillin for Pneumonia in Pakistan. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 383, 24–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tremblay, M.S.; Aubert, S.; Barnes, J.D.; Saunders, T.J.; Carson, V.; Latimer-Cheung, A.E.; Chastin, S.F.M.; Altenburg, T.M.; Chinapaw, M.J.M.; Altenburg, T.M.; et al. Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN)—Terminology Consensus Project Process and Outcome. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biswas, A.; Oh, P.I.; Faulkner, G.E.; Bajaj, R.R.; Silver, M.A.; Mitchell, M.S.; Alter, D.A. Sedentary Time and Its Association With Risk for Disease Incidence, Mortality, and Hospitalization in Adults. Ann. Intern. Med. 2015, 162, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- López-Valenciano, A.; Mayo, X.; Liguori, G.; Copeland, R.J.; Lamb, M.; Jimenez, A. Changes in Sedentary Behaviour in European Union Adults between 2002 and 2017. BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 1206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WHO. Urban Population Growth. Available online: http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth/en/ (accessed on 20 November 2020).
- DiPietro, L.; Buchner, D.M.; Marquez, D.X.; Pate, R.R.; Pescatello, L.S.; Whitt-Glover, M.C. New scientific basis for the 2018 U.S. Physical Activity Guidelines. J. Sport Health Sci. 2019, 8, 197–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/288267/ITALY-Physical-Activity-Factsheet.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2021).
- Tomlinson, D.J.; Erskine, R.M.; Morse, C.I.; Winwood, K.; Onambélé-Pearson, G. The Impact of Obesity on Skeletal Muscle Strength and Structure through Adolescence to Old Age. Biogerontology 2016, 17, 467–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowler, D.E.; Lisette, M.B.A.; Knight, T.M.; Pullin, A.S. A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments. BMC Public Health 2010, 10, 456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandola, A.; Vancampfort, D.; Herring, M.; Rebar, A.; Hallgren, M.; Firth, J.; Stubbs, B. Moving to Beat Anxiety: Epidemiology and Therapeutic Issues with Physical Activity for Anxiety. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 2018, 20, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mytton, O.T.; Townsend, N.; Rutter, H.; Foster, C. Green Space and Physical Activity: An Observational Study Using Health Survey for England Data. Health Place 2012, 18, 1034–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Dai, X.; Wu, J.; Wu, X.; Nie, X. Influence of Urban Green Open Space on Residents’ Physical Activity in China. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, K.T. The effect of nature and physical activity on emotions and attention while engaging in green exercise. Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 24, 5–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Remme, R.P.; Frumkin, H.; Guerry, A.D.; King, A.C.; Mandle, L.; Sarabu, C.; Bratman, G.N.; Giles-Corti, B.; Hamel, P.; Han, B.; et al. An Ecosystem Service Perspective on Urban Nature, Physical Activity, and Health. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2018472118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lahart, I.; Darcy, P.; Gidlow, C.; Calogiuri, G. The effects of green exercise on physical and mental wellbeing: A systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barton, J.; Pretty, J. What is the best dose of nature and green exercise for improving mental health? a multi-study analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 3947–3955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gladwell, V.F.; Brown, D.K.; Wood, C.; Sandercock, G.R.; Barton, J.L. The great outdoors: How a green exercise environment can benefit all. Extreme Physiol. Med. 2013, 2, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, A. Open space and Sense of Community of older adults—a study in a residential area in Hong Kong. Archnet IJAR 2021, 15, 539–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, A. Walkable environment and community well-being: The case in the city of Kwun Tong. Open House Int. 2021, 46, 162–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kothencz, G.; Kolcsár, R.; Cabrera-Barona, P.; Szilassi, P. Urban Green Space Perception and Its Contribution to Well-Being. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2017, 14, 766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karacor, E.K.; Parlar, G. Conceptual model of the relationship between neighbourhood attachment, collective efficacy and open space quality. Open House Int. 2017, 42, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moore, H.J.; Nixon, C.A.; Lake, A.A.; Douthwaite, W.; O’Malley, C.L.; Pedley, C.L.; Summerbell, C.D.; Routen, A.C. The Environment Can Explain Differences in Adolescents’ Daily Physical Activity Levels Living in a Deprived Urban Area: Cross-Sectional Study Using Accelerometry, GPS, and Focus Groups. J. Phys. Act. Health 2014, 11, 1517–1524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lachowycz, K.; Jones, A.P. Towards a Better Understanding of the Relationship between Greenspace and Health: Development of a Theoretical Framework. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 118, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klinker, C.D.; Schipperijn, J.; Christian, H.; Kerr, J.; Ersbøll, A.K.; Troelsen, J. Using Accelerometers and Global Positioning System Devices to Assess Gender and Age Differences in Children’s School, Transport, Leisure and Home Based Physical Activity. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coon, J.T.; Boddy, K.; Stein, K.; Whear, R.; Barton, J.; Depledge, M.H. Does participating in physical activity in outdoor natural environments have a greater effect on physical and mental wellbeing than physical activity indoors? a systematic review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 1761–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitchell, R. Is physical activity in natural environments better for mental health than physical activity in other environments? Soc. Sci. Med. 2013, 91, 130–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Veitch, J.; Carver, A.; Abbott, G.; Giles-Corti, B.; Timperio, A.; Salmon, J. How Active Are People in Metropolitan Parks? An Observational Study of Park Visitation in Australia. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallace, D.D.; Derose, K.P.; Han, B.; Cohen, D.A. The Effects of Park-Based Interventions on Health: A Systematic Review Protocol. Syst. Rev. 2020, 9, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Derose, K.P.; Wallace, D.D.; Han, B.; Cohen, D.A. Effects of Park-Based Interventions on Health-Related Outcomes: A Systematic Review. Prev. Med. 2021, 147, 106528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petrunoff, N.; Yao, J.; Sia, A.; Ng, A.; Ramiah, A.; Wong, M.; Han, J.; Tai, B.C.; Uijtdewilligen, L.; Müller-Riemenschneider, F. Activity in nature mediates a park prescription intervention’s effects on physical activity, park use and quality of life: A mixed-methods process evaluation. BMC Public Health 2021, 22, 204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Müller-Riemenschneider, F.; Petrunoff, N.; Yao, J.; Ng, A.; Sia, A.; Ramiah, A.; Wong, M.; Han, J.; Tai, B.C.; Uijtdewilligen, L. Effectiveness of prescribing physical activity in parks to improve health and wellbeing—the park prescription randomized controlled trial. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020, 17, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sellers, C.E.; Grant, P.M.; Ryan, C.G.; O’Kane, C.; Raw, K.; Conn, D. Take a walk in the park? A cross-over pilot trial comparing brisk walking in two different environments: Park and urban. Prev. Med. 2012, 55, 438–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- De Bloom, J.; Sianoja, M.; Korpela, K.; Tuomisto, M.; Lilja, A.; Geurts, S.; Kinnunen, U. Effects of park walks and relaxation exercises during lunch breaks on recovery from job stress: Two randomized controlled trials. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 51, 14–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Available online: https://en.unesco.org/sustainabledevelopmentgoals) (accessed on 29 December 2021).
- Available online: http://dru.iperbole.bologna.it/pianificazione?filter=Piano%20Urbanistico%20Generale%20(PUG) (accessed on 8 February 2021).
- Grossi, E.; Groth, N.; Mosconi, P.; Cerutti, R.; Pace, F.; Compare, A.; Apolone, G. Development and validation of the short version of the Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWB-S). Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2006, 4, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Davies, A.R.; Ware, J.E. Measuring Health Perceptions in the Health Insurance Experiment; Pub. No. R-2711-HHS; RAND Corporation: Santa Monica, CA, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
- Xia, Y.; Yang, Y. RMSEA, CFI, and TLI in structural equation modeling with ordered categorical data: The story they tell depends on the estimation methods. Behav. Res. 2019, 51, 409–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gualdi-Russo, E.; Rinaldo, N.; Pasini, A.; Zaccagni, L. Hand Preference and Performance in Basketball Tasks. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schermelleh-Engel, K.; Moosbrugger, H.; Müller, H. Evaluating the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-Fit Measures. Methods Psychol. Res. 2003, 8, 23–74. [Google Scholar]
- Hunter, R.F.; Christian, H.; Veitch, J.; Astell-Burt, T.; Hipp, J.A.; Schipperijn, J. The Impact of Interventions to Promote Physical Activity in Urban Green Space: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Research. Soc. Sci. Med. 2015, 124, 246–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nature and Mental Health: An Ecosystem Service Perspective. Available online: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aax0903 (accessed on 9 December 2021).
- Browning, M.; Lee, K. Within What Distance Does “Greenness” Best Predict Physical Health? A Systematic Review of Articles with GIS Buffer Analyses across the Lifespan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2017, 14, 675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dependent Variables | Variance | R2 | χ2 | p | CFI | TLI | SRMR | Cronbach α | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fitted | Predicted | Residual | ||||||||
item 5 | 1.075 | 0.456 | 0.618 | 0.424 | ||||||
item 6 | 0.897 | 0.261 | 0.635 | 0.291 | ||||||
item 7 | 0.752 | 0.531 | 0.22 | 0.706 | ||||||
item 18 | 1.522 | 0.721 | 0.8 | 0.474 | ||||||
item 20 | 1.4 | 0.753 | 0.648 | 0.537 | ||||||
item 21 | 0.752 | 0.312 | 0.44 | 0.414 | ||||||
Model | 0.85 | 7.983 | 0.33 | 0.018 | 0.845 | |||||
Baseline | 756.5 | <0.001 | 0.999 | 0.997 |
Females (257) | Males (72) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18–44 Yrs. | 45–64 Yrs. | >65 Yrs. | Χ2 | p | 18–44 Yrs. | 45–64 Yrs. | >65 Yrs. | Χ2 | p | |
N (%) | 42 (16.3) | 115 (44.7) | 100 (38.9) | 21 (29.2) | 24 (33.3) | 27 (37.5) | ||||
Live in the neighborhood (yes) | 40.5 | 61.4 | 79.8 | 22.3 | 0.001 | 42.9 | 41.7 | 63.0 | 2.9 | 0.233 |
Way used for travel (baseline) | ||||||||||
Car, motorcycle, scooter | 31.0 | 43.9 | 21.4 | 12.4 | 0.015 | 42.9 | 50.0 | 40.7 | 2.2 | 0.695 |
Walking or cycling | 47.6 | 38.6 | 51.0 | 42.9 | 33.3 | 51.9 | ||||
Public transport | 21.4 | 17.5 | 27.6 | 14.3 | 16.7 | 7.4 | ||||
Way used for travel (follow-up) | ||||||||||
Car, motorcycle, scooter | 33.3 | 42.1 | 19.0 | 14.6 | 0.006 | 38.1 | 41.7 | 22.2 | 2.7 | 0.603 |
Walking or cycling | 47.6 | 38.6 | 49.0 | 47.6 | 45.8 | 55.6 | ||||
Public transport | 19.0 | 19.3 | 32.0 | 14.3 | 12.5 | 22.2 | ||||
Usually use (baseline) | ||||||||||
Elevators | 28.2 | 33.0 | 41.8 | 2.7 | 0.254 | 27.8 | 30.0 | 41.7 | 1.1 | 0.582 |
Stairs | 71.8 | 67.0 | 58.2 | 72.2 | 70.0 | 58.3 | ||||
Usually use (follow-up) | ||||||||||
Elevators | 22.0 | 27.4 | 38.5 | 4.8 | 0.090 | 10.0 | 20.8 | 48.1 | 9.2 | 0.010 |
Stairs | 78.0 | 72.6 | 61.5 | 90.0 | 79.2 | 51.9 | ||||
Start PA practice with the project (yes) | 26.2 | 32.1 | 28.9 | 0.6 | 0.748 | 9.5 | 25.0 | 25.9 | 2.5 | 0.282 |
Plan to practice PA at the end of the project (yes) | 100.0 | 98.2 | 97.0 | 1.4 | 0.490 | 100.0 | 95.5 | 96.2 | 0.9 | 0.631 |
Frequency with which participant intends to practice | ||||||||||
2.5 h | 40.5 | 41.9 | 50.5 | 2.2 | 0.693 | 28.6 | 34.8 | 30.8 | 1.6 | 0.816 |
<2.5 h | 16.7 | 16.2 | 11.6 | 19.0 | 13.0 | 7.7 | ||||
>2.5 h | 42.9 | 41.9 | 37.9 | 52.4 | 52.2 | 61.5 |
18–44 Yrs. | 45–64 Yrs. | >65 Yrs. | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Z | p | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Z | p | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
Females | ||||||||||||||||
Height | 164.5 | 6.2 | 163.6 | 6.4 | 159.1 | 5.6 | ||||||||||
Weight | 60.3 | 11.1 | 60.2 | 10.9 | 0.7 | 0.465 | 61.7 | 9.1 | 61.8 | 9.2 | 0.0 | 0.981 | 63.7 | 9.7 | 63.4 | 9.8 |
BMI | 22.4 | 3.9 | 22.5 | 3.9 | 1.0 | 0.300 | 23.0 | 3.4 | 23.1 | 3.5 | 1.0 | 0.340 | 25.2 | 3.4 | 25.0 | 3.5 |
Males | ||||||||||||||||
Height | 177.7 | 7.7 | 177.9 | 8.4 | 175.6 | 7.3 | 175.3 | 7.4 | 174.7 | 5.8 | 175.0 | 6.3 | ||||
Weight | 73.7 | 10.8 | 73.6 | 10.8 | 0.4 | 0.674 | 75.7 | 11.0 | 76.1 | 10.4 | 1.4 | 0.154 | 74.5 | 7.9 | 74.8 | 8.6 |
BMI | 23.5 | 3.5 | 23.4 | 3.7 | 0.1 | 0.889 | 24.6 | 3.5 | 24.8 | 3.6 | 0.0 | 1.000 | 24.4 | 2.6 | 24.4 | 2.6 |
Weight status | % | % | χ2 | p | % | % | χ2 | p | % | % | ||||||
Females | ||||||||||||||||
Underweight | 5.1 | 5.3 | 0.3 | 0.957 | 3.6 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 0.968 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||
Normal weight | 76.9 | 76.3 | 73.0 | 73.2 | 53.5 | 55.2 | ||||||||||
Overweight | 10.3 | 13.2 | 19.8 | 19.6 | 36.4 | 35.4 | ||||||||||
Obese | 7.7 | 5.3 | 3.6 | 4.5 | 9.1 | 8.3 | ||||||||||
Males | ||||||||||||||||
Underweight | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||
Normal weight | 75.0 | 76.2 | 0.5 | 0.785 | 70.8 | 65.2 | 0.4 | 0.804 | 61.5 | 61.5 | ||||||
Overweight | 20.0 | 14.3 | 25.0 | 26.1 | 38.5 | 38.5 | ||||||||||
Obese | 5.0 | 9.5 | 4.2 | 8.7 | - | - |
18–44 Yrs. | 45–64 Yrs. | >65 Yrs. | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean Pre | (±SD) | Mean Post | (±SD) | Z | p | Mean Pre | (±SD) | Mean Post | (±SD) | Z | p | Mean Pre | (±SD) | Mean Post | (±SD) | Z | p | Range | |
Females | |||||||||||||||||||
Importance of PA | 71.6 | (20.5) | 76.4 | (15.7) | 1.8 | 0.068 | 73.1 | (16.1) | 77.1 | (15.1) | 3.4 | 0.001 | 73.3 | (12.7) | 76.4 | (12.8) | 2.7 | 0.007 | 0–100 |
Feel tense | 4.5 | (1.1) | 5.1 | (1.1) | 2.6 | 0.010 | 4.8 | (1.0) | 5.2 | (1.0) | 3.1 | 0.002 | 5.1 | (1.0) | 5.4 | (0.8) | 2.6 | 0.010 | 1–6 |
Fell full of energy | 2.7 | (1.0) | 1.9 | (0.8) | 3.6 | 0.000 | 2.6 | (1.0) | 2.2 | (0.9) | 3.8 | 0.000 | 2.6 | (0.8) | 2.2 | (0.7) | 3.7 | 0.000 | 1–6 |
Feel discouraged | 2.5 | (0.8) | 2.0 | (0.8) | 2.9 | 0.004 | 2.3 | (0.8) | 2.1 | (0.8) | 2.4 | 0.017 | 2.3 | (1.0) | 2.0 | (0.9) | 2.5 | 0.012 | 1–6 |
Feel confident | 4.0 | (1.1) | 4.4 | (1.3) | 2.0 | 0.049 | 4.0 | (1.2) | 4.2 | (1.3) | 1.4 | 0.173 | 4.1 | (1.3) | 4.5 | (1.2) | 3.1 | 0.002 | 1–6 |
Feel calm and happy | 4.0 | (1.2) | 4.5 | (1.1) | 2.7 | 0.006 | 4.0 | (1.1) | 4.2 | (1.1) | 2.3 | 0.019 | 3.9 | (1.2) | 4.4 | (1.1) | 3.5 | 0.000 | 1–6 |
Feel tired | 2.6 | (0.9) | 2.0 | (0.6) | 3.1 | 0.002 | 2.5 | (0.8) | 2.2 | (0.8) | 3.4 | 0.001 | 2.4 | (0.9) | 2.2 | (0.8) | 2.0 | 0.048 | 1–6 |
Males | |||||||||||||||||||
Importance of PA | 72.8 | (16.9) | 78.6 | (16.6) | 2.2 | 0.031 | 77.7 | (16.3) | 82.4 | (15.1) | 1.1 | 0.270 | 73.6 | (11.6) | 74.1 | (12.4) | 1.2 | 0.215 | 0–100 |
Feel tense | 5.0 | (1.3) | 5.4 | (0.6) | 1.5 | 0.123 | 5.0 | (1.0) | 5.4 | (0.8) | 2.0 | 0.042 | 5.0 | (0.8) | 5.3 | (0.5) | 1.5 | 0.133 | 1–6 |
Fell full of energy | 2.5 | (1.4) | 1.9 | (0.9) | 1.7 | 0.093 | 2.3 | (0.8) | 1.9 | (0.5) | 2.3 | 0.023 | 2.6 | (0.8) | 2.0 | (0.8) | 2.2 | 0.028 | 1–6 |
Feel discouraged | 2.3 | (1.1) | 1.9 | (0.7) | 1.3 | 0.178 | 2.4 | (0.8) | 2.0 | (0.9) | 1.9 | 0.059 | 2.5 | (0.8) | 1.8 | (0.6) | 3.2 | 0.001 | 1–6 |
Feel confident | 4.0 | (1.5) | 4.5 | (1.3) | 1.4 | 0.173 | 4.1 | (1.4) | 4.6 | (1.0) | 1.7 | 0.088 | 3.9 | (1.2) | 4.0 | (1.2) | 0.5 | 0.629 | 1–6 |
Feel calm and happy | 4.3 | (1.4) | 4.5 | (1.3) | 0.6 | 0.529 | 4.3 | (1.0) | 4.4 | (1.0) | 0.6 | 0.569 | 3.6 | (1.2) | 4.3 | (1.2) | 2.9 | 0.003 | 1–6 |
Feel tired | 2.4 | (1.0) | 2.1 | (0.8) | 1.2 | 0.249 | 2.6 | (0.9) | 1.9 | (0.5) | 2.6 | 0.009 | 2.3 | (1.0) | 1.9 | (0.7) | 2.0 | 0.041 | 1–6 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Toselli, S.; Bragonzoni, L.; Dallolio, L.; Grigoletto, A.; Masini, A.; Marini, S.; Barone, G.; Pinelli, E.; Zinno, R.; Mauro, M.; et al. The Effects of Park Based Interventions on Health: The Italian Project “Moving Parks”. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 2130. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042130
Toselli S, Bragonzoni L, Dallolio L, Grigoletto A, Masini A, Marini S, Barone G, Pinelli E, Zinno R, Mauro M, et al. The Effects of Park Based Interventions on Health: The Italian Project “Moving Parks”. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(4):2130. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042130
Chicago/Turabian StyleToselli, Stefania, Laura Bragonzoni, Laura Dallolio, Alessia Grigoletto, Alice Masini, Sofia Marini, Giuseppe Barone, Erika Pinelli, Raffaele Zinno, Mario Mauro, and et al. 2022. "The Effects of Park Based Interventions on Health: The Italian Project “Moving Parks”" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 4: 2130. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042130
APA StyleToselli, S., Bragonzoni, L., Dallolio, L., Grigoletto, A., Masini, A., Marini, S., Barone, G., Pinelli, E., Zinno, R., Mauro, M., Astorino, G., Loro Pilone, P., Galli, S., & Maietta Latessa, P. (2022). The Effects of Park Based Interventions on Health: The Italian Project “Moving Parks”. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(4), 2130. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042130