dual demographic and socioeconomic characteristics and clustering at the district level.
- Results. Results showed small associations between more specific JUPs and increased PA (IRR 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.02). Closer examination of specific JUP provisions indicates that specifying what times facilities are available for use was associated with vigorous exercise and prioritizing school or affiliated organizations' use and which spaces were available for use were associated with vigorous exercise and more frequent PA participation, which includes participation in sports or athletics. No associations were found between more specific JUPs and SB.
- Conclusions. JUPS may have small influences on adolescent physical activity behavior. Future longitudinal studies should be conducted to examine the impact of JUPs in conjunction with other physical activity-related policies and environmental changes to determine what impact they have on overall adolescent physical activity and sedentary behavior.
Slater S, Chriqui J, Chaloupka FJ, Johnston L. Joint use policies: Are they related to adolescent behavior? Prev. Med 2014 Dec; 69S:S37-S43.
- Defining healthy schools remains largely discipline specific. Design disciplines ground discussions in a “green building” framework. Public health approaches healthy schools through programmatic interventions for physical activity and nutrition.
- This article presents a more systemic approach to healthy schools via health impact assessment (HIA). It reviews literature on health determinants in school environments, focusing on physical design. Existing school HIAs are reviewed with other decision support tools that provide guidance on the operation and design of healthy schools.
- The paper examines current use of HIAs in schools and develops a screening matrix for using HIA in creating healthy schools.
Arthi Rao, Catherine L. Ross. Health Impact Assessments and Healthy Schools. Journal of Planning Education and Research 2014;34(2):141-152.
- Despite the growing interest in expanding the j