Greetings all,
Also relevant to the discussion of HEAT - CDC is exploring the development and dissemination of HEAT tools in the US and, along with Active Living Research, commissioned a survey of potential HEAT users. The brief summary report of the survey findings can be found here:
http://www.activelivingresearch.org/files/HEATReport_Final.pdf
----
Chad Spoon, MRP
Research Coordinator
Active Living Research
University of California, San Diego
3900 Fifth Avenue, Suite 310
San Diego, CA 92103
Voicemail: 619-260-5539
Fax: 619-260-1510
Website: www.activelivingresearch.org
A national program supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Building the evidence to prevent childhood obesity and support active communities.
-----Original Message-----
From: h+t--friends-bounces(a)chrispy.net [mailto:h+t--friends-bounces@chrispy.net] On Behalf Of h+t--friends-request(a)chrispy.net
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 10:00 AM
To: h+t--friends(a)ryoko.chrispy.net
Subject: H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 9, Issue 10
Send H+T--Friends mailing list submissions to
h+t--friends(a)ryoko.chrispy.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://ryoko.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
h+t--friends-request(a)ryoko.chrispy.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
h+t--friends-owner(a)ryoko.chrispy.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of H+T--Friends digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for walking and
cycling (Jason Meggs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:49:49 +0100
From: Jason Meggs <jason(a)healthycity.net>
Subject: [H+T--Friends] Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for
walking and cycling
To: TRB Health and Transportation <h+t--friends(a)chrispy.net>
Message-ID:
<CAMXZTAxm2_kMRANG8enLNs9j1ewWQVw6qLKbbn6WyP9-j82PUQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Dear friends in H+T,
There's a new health assessment tool, an online calculator for the
economic benefits of increased walking and cycling, e.g., due to an
intervention.
Report:
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/155631/E96097.pdf
Calculator:
http://www.heatwalkingcycling.org/
Having spent some time trying the calculator, I wrote the below
overview and observations (including how to avoid certain pitfalls) to
help people have an easier time with the tool. This forwarded message
thread was originally written to the email discussion list of the
Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP), in
response to Anne Lusk at the Harvard School of Public Health.
Jason
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jason Meggs <jason(a)healthycity.net>
Date: Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [apbp] Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for
walking and cycling
To: Anne Lusk <ANNELUSK(a)hsph.harvard.edu>
Cc: members(a)lists.apbp.org
Thanks Anne,
Great stuff. We're experimenting with HEAT for the BICY project here
in Central Europe.
Very useful -- there's an online calculator:
http://www.heatwalkingcycling.org/
This calculates, for either walking or cycling, "an economic
assessment of the health benefits of walking or cycling by estimating
the value of reduced mortality that results from specified amounts of
walking or cycling".
Even better, one can choose two points in time, when the amount of
cycling changed, to show the benefits of an effort to increase cycling
by calculating economic benefits over a period of years after the
change. ?I suspect one could also show the costs of some horrible
change that made people walk or cycle less. ?The tool can be more
versatile than the instructions suggest.
Because while experimenting with this calculator, I found it would be
helpful to know what would be needed in advance (there are a number of
paths to take, and a variety of data needed for each path), I am
summarising it here for APBP folks.
This is also because, *warning*, ?it can be a bit buggy if one has
more than one open at a time -- jumping to the results based on
another of the previous/other instance(s) -- and possibly not
functioning properly when one goes back and forth to try different
options. ?That's part of why I took the trouble of summarising the
tool's input needs. I'll send this recommendation to the authors as
well.
Thus, if exploring with this, I recommend you open only one instance
at a time and to start a new one, click on "exit the assessment"
and/or close the one you have, and only then click on "start a new
assessment".
There are some limitations to be aware of in addition to the amount of
literature available to base the calculator on, such as the target
population being 20-64 years (no children, no seniors), and a focus
only on regular trips (although you may be able to use irregular trips
if you know the correct total and/or average amounts). The data
required may also be challenging to obtain for many places and years.
Although it gives great options by performing the calculation using
either of three categories (trips, duration, or distance, and a fourth
for walking -- number of steps). Thus it would be good if the project
summarised this on the website before one starts, to help one choose
the best path to work towards fulfilling (e.g., so you can plan based
on whether the data is available).
For the trips instance, one needs to provide the population of the
regular cyclists as well as their average individual rates, ?.
For distance and duration, you need:
* Amount per cyclist (minutes or hours for duration; km, metres or
miles for distance)
* Days cycled per year (always interesting to seek out weather patterns)
* Number of individuals doing the amount of cycling entered
For trips (average per person or total observed across a population), you need:
average number of trips per person (adult), or total number of trips:
A. average number of trips per person:
- The average number of trips per person per day
- Days per year do people cycle this amount
- Proportion of these trips are cycling trips
- Average trip duration or distance (WARNING, the default options are
reversed here from the above; default is now hours not minutes for
duration, and metres not km for distance)
- The number of individuals doing the amount of cycling you entered
B. Alternately, total number of trips:
- the number of trips observed per day:
- proportion of these trips are cycling trips
- then either the number of people who take cycling trips, or estimate
the number of cyclists based on the proportion of return journeys out
of all trips observed (takes you to a calculator, with a page of
instructions)
- average trip duration or distance
I did not fully assess yet whether walking benefits are calculated
differently than cycling, but it looks the same with the addition of
an exciting new option:
C. Number of steps! For this you need:
- Average # steps for an average day, week, month or year
- Average step length
After dealing with one of the three (or four, for walking) main
choices above, the calculator is probably the same for the rest:
You also need to choose a mortality rate, and the economic value of a
life. (There are default values offered for Europe and some other
countries, but not for the USA and Canada.
You next choose the "standard value of a statistical life used in the
country of study" (a problematic concept at best..) and the currency.
Here you can use the CAD or USD, although CAD is not in alphabetical
order.
You can also assess the cost effectiveness of an intervention (you
must know the cost of promoting cycling, and use a number for the
expected change in cycling). So if you have an idea of how much
cycling will increase from, say, a big promotional campaign, or
building new facilities, you can make an economic assessment of the
cost effectiveness of the intervention (although limited as you can
only study part of the cycling, limited by age and whatever regular
trips you have data for, but of course one can estimate or run various
scenarios on possible outcomes).
Lastly, you must also choose a discount rate (always an easy task!). A
default of 5.0% is offered.
Note that if you chose to compare two points in time, you will also
enter your post-intervention cycling data (data on the second point in
time). ?Good news, you have three choices again in case your data
types differ for the two points in time. ?You will also be asked to
estimate the proportion of the new cycling attributable to the
intervention (or just 100% to assess all cycling, or to recklessly
assume the intervention did all the work). You also have to give time
to "maximum uptake" which basically is a fancy way of asking how many
years between the two points in time. ?(The calculator directions
sometimes assumes too much; what if you are assessing two points that
occurred in the past?) ?Be sure to differentiate between that time
period for the increase of cycling, and the time period during which
benefits accrue (assuming cycling is now at a new steady level, total
the benefits you get for X years.).
I hope this is helpful and makes the calculator easier to use. I'd be
interested to hear of anyone using these tools and what you think (and
what your results were :).
Happy calculating!
Jason
===
Jason N. Meggs, J.M., M.C.P., M.P.H.
University of Bologna
DICAM - Transportation Engineering Group
Viale Risorgimento, 2
40136 Bologna, Italy
Office: +39 051 209 3338
Fax: +39 051 209 3337
Mobile: +39 333 1565 787
Email: jason.meggs(a)unibo.it
????????? jason(a)healthycity.net
????????? jmeggs(a)berkeley.edu
Web: http://jasonmeggs.com/
Skype: jasonmeggs
USA Phone: +1 510-725-9991
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Anne Lusk <ANNELUSK(a)hsph.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Dear All,
> ??? Here is a link to the "Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for
> walking and cycling.
>
> http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/155631/E96097.pdf
>
> Page 16 discusses the Relative Risk of bicycling and walking.? There weren't
> enough articles for bicycling so they are relying on the Relative Risk from
> the Anderson article.?The study did not look at speeds of bicyclists or
> pedestrians. Thomas Gotschi, who?some may know from?his having worked at
> Rails-to-Trails, was a member of the committee.
>
> Anne
>
>
> Anne Lusk, Ph.D.
> Harvard School of Public Health
> 665 Huntington Ave Bld II Rm 314
> Boston, MA 02115
> AnneLusk(a)hsph.harvard.edu
> 617-432-7076 work
> 617-872-9201 cell
> 617-432-2435 fax
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> http://lists.apbp.org/listmanager/listinfo/members
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
H+T--Friends mailing list
H+T--Friends(a)ryoko.chrispy.net
http://ryoko.chrispy.net/mailman/listinfo/h+t--friends
End of H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 9, Issue 10
*******************************************
Dear friends in H+T,
There's a new health assessment tool, an online calculator for the
economic benefits of increased walking and cycling, e.g., due to an
intervention.
Report:
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/155631/E96097.pdf
Calculator:
http://www.heatwalkingcycling.org/
Having spent some time trying the calculator, I wrote the below
overview and observations (including how to avoid certain pitfalls) to
help people have an easier time with the tool. This forwarded message
thread was originally written to the email discussion list of the
Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP), in
response to Anne Lusk at the Harvard School of Public Health.
Jason
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jason Meggs <jason(a)healthycity.net>
Date: Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:27 PM
Subject: Re: [apbp] Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for
walking and cycling
To: Anne Lusk <ANNELUSK(a)hsph.harvard.edu>
Cc: members(a)lists.apbp.org
Thanks Anne,
Great stuff. We're experimenting with HEAT for the BICY project here
in Central Europe.
Very useful -- there's an online calculator:
http://www.heatwalkingcycling.org/
This calculates, for either walking or cycling, "an economic
assessment of the health benefits of walking or cycling by estimating
the value of reduced mortality that results from specified amounts of
walking or cycling".
Even better, one can choose two points in time, when the amount of
cycling changed, to show the benefits of an effort to increase cycling
by calculating economic benefits over a period of years after the
change. I suspect one could also show the costs of some horrible
change that made people walk or cycle less. The tool can be more
versatile than the instructions suggest.
Because while experimenting with this calculator, I found it would be
helpful to know what would be needed in advance (there are a number of
paths to take, and a variety of data needed for each path), I am
summarising it here for APBP folks.
This is also because, *warning*, it can be a bit buggy if one has
more than one open at a time -- jumping to the results based on
another of the previous/other instance(s) -- and possibly not
functioning properly when one goes back and forth to try different
options. That's part of why I took the trouble of summarising the
tool's input needs. I'll send this recommendation to the authors as
well.
Thus, if exploring with this, I recommend you open only one instance
at a time and to start a new one, click on "exit the assessment"
and/or close the one you have, and only then click on "start a new
assessment".
There are some limitations to be aware of in addition to the amount of
literature available to base the calculator on, such as the target
population being 20-64 years (no children, no seniors), and a focus
only on regular trips (although you may be able to use irregular trips
if you know the correct total and/or average amounts). The data
required may also be challenging to obtain for many places and years.
Although it gives great options by performing the calculation using
either of three categories (trips, duration, or distance, and a fourth
for walking -- number of steps). Thus it would be good if the project
summarised this on the website before one starts, to help one choose
the best path to work towards fulfilling (e.g., so you can plan based
on whether the data is available).
For the trips instance, one needs to provide the population of the
regular cyclists as well as their average individual rates, .
For distance and duration, you need:
* Amount per cyclist (minutes or hours for duration; km, metres or
miles for distance)
* Days cycled per year (always interesting to seek out weather patterns)
* Number of individuals doing the amount of cycling entered
For trips (average per person or total observed across a population), you need:
average number of trips per person (adult), or total number of trips:
A. average number of trips per person:
- The average number of trips per person per day
- Days per year do people cycle this amount
- Proportion of these trips are cycling trips
- Average trip duration or distance (WARNING, the default options are
reversed here from the above; default is now hours not minutes for
duration, and metres not km for distance)
- The number of individuals doing the amount of cycling you entered
B. Alternately, total number of trips:
- the number of trips observed per day:
- proportion of these trips are cycling trips
- then either the number of people who take cycling trips, or estimate
the number of cyclists based on the proportion of return journeys out
of all trips observed (takes you to a calculator, with a page of
instructions)
- average trip duration or distance
I did not fully assess yet whether walking benefits are calculated
differently than cycling, but it looks the same with the addition of
an exciting new option:
C. Number of steps! For this you need:
- Average # steps for an average day, week, month or year
- Average step length
After dealing with one of the three (or four, for walking) main
choices above, the calculator is probably the same for the rest:
You also need to choose a mortality rate, and the economic value of a
life. (There are default values offered for Europe and some other
countries, but not for the USA and Canada.
You next choose the "standard value of a statistical life used in the
country of study" (a problematic concept at best..) and the currency.
Here you can use the CAD or USD, although CAD is not in alphabetical
order.
You can also assess the cost effectiveness of an intervention (you
must know the cost of promoting cycling, and use a number for the
expected change in cycling). So if you have an idea of how much
cycling will increase from, say, a big promotional campaign, or
building new facilities, you can make an economic assessment of the
cost effectiveness of the intervention (although limited as you can
only study part of the cycling, limited by age and whatever regular
trips you have data for, but of course one can estimate or run various
scenarios on possible outcomes).
Lastly, you must also choose a discount rate (always an easy task!). A
default of 5.0% is offered.
Note that if you chose to compare two points in time, you will also
enter your post-intervention cycling data (data on the second point in
time). Good news, you have three choices again in case your data
types differ for the two points in time. You will also be asked to
estimate the proportion of the new cycling attributable to the
intervention (or just 100% to assess all cycling, or to recklessly
assume the intervention did all the work). You also have to give time
to "maximum uptake" which basically is a fancy way of asking how many
years between the two points in time. (The calculator directions
sometimes assumes too much; what if you are assessing two points that
occurred in the past?) Be sure to differentiate between that time
period for the increase of cycling, and the time period during which
benefits accrue (assuming cycling is now at a new steady level, total
the benefits you get for X years.).
I hope this is helpful and makes the calculator easier to use. I'd be
interested to hear of anyone using these tools and what you think (and
what your results were :).
Happy calculating!
Jason
===
Jason N. Meggs, J.M., M.C.P., M.P.H.
University of Bologna
DICAM - Transportation Engineering Group
Viale Risorgimento, 2
40136 Bologna, Italy
Office: +39 051 209 3338
Fax: +39 051 209 3337
Mobile: +39 333 1565 787
Email: jason.meggs(a)unibo.it
jason(a)healthycity.net
jmeggs(a)berkeley.edu
Web: http://jasonmeggs.com/
Skype: jasonmeggs
USA Phone: +1 510-725-9991
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Anne Lusk <ANNELUSK(a)hsph.harvard.edu> wrote:
> Dear All,
> Here is a link to the "Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for
> walking and cycling.
>
> http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/155631/E96097.pdf
>
> Page 16 discusses the Relative Risk of bicycling and walking. There weren't
> enough articles for bicycling so they are relying on the Relative Risk from
> the Anderson article. The study did not look at speeds of bicyclists or
> pedestrians. Thomas Gotschi, who some may know from his having worked at
> Rails-to-Trails, was a member of the committee.
>
> Anne
>
>
> Anne Lusk, Ph.D.
> Harvard School of Public Health
> 665 Huntington Ave Bld II Rm 314
> Boston, MA 02115
> AnneLusk(a)hsph.harvard.edu
> 617-432-7076 work
> 617-872-9201 cell
> 617-432-2435 fax
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members mailing list
> http://lists.apbp.org/listmanager/listinfo/members
>
I will be out of the office starting 01/20/2012 and will not return until
01/26/2012.
I will be at a conference and checking email semi-regularly. I will respond
to your email as soon as I can. Thank you!
What is the relationship between car travel and health outcomes in the
United States? Ariel Godwin and Anne Price challenge the claim that more
time in the car decreases your health by looking at the impacts of
education, income, and employment rates.
http://www.planetizen.com/node/53728
--
Ed Christopher
FHWA Resource Center Planning Team
4749 Lincoln Mall Drive, Suite 600
Matteson, IL 60443
708-283-3534 (V)
708-574-8131 (C)
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
There is new information for TRB on the H+T Subcommittee website: www.trbhealth.org. We've added a list of sessions and meetings that are of direct interest to the Subcommittee, as well as a longer list of sessions that we are calling our "Health and Transportation Picks." You can find these on the Subcommittee homepage and in the left-hand side menu of the page.
If you can suggest additions to the list of H+T Picks, please send us your suggestions at trbcommitteeadd5001(a)gmail.com.
Also, please feel fee to contact Carey McAndrews (cmcandrews(a)wisc.edu) or Phyllis Orrick (phylliso(a)berkeley.edu) directly with any questions you may have.
We are looking forward to seeing the H+T Friends at TRB this year.
Best,
Carey and Phyllis
I will be out of the office starting 01/12/2012 and will not return until
01/18/2012.
I will respond to your email as soon as I can upon my return. Thank you!
Attached is a call for proposals for a TRB synthesis study sponsored by
ACHRP on "Air Quality and Public Health Studies Related to Airports. This
study should be of great interest to people interested in health and
transportation. I believe that the proposals are due January 18.
Ellin
--
Ellin Reisner, Ph.D.
reisnere51(a)gmail.com
Good morning everyone,
Thanks to everyone who participated in the recent subcommittee survey
that was shared via this listserve. One of the bits of information
lifted from your responses was that "information on new or existing
policies, regulations, laws, or legislative processes" was deemed quite
valuable to a healthy majority of survey respondents.
With that in mind, I just heard about this free webinar next week on the
U.S. Congress' work on the transportation authorization; it may be of
interest to you and your networks. As people hear of other events,
please share them.
********
Join the Alliance and the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle
Professionals for a free U.S. Federal Transportation Policy Webinar next
Wednesday, January 11, at3 p.m. Eastern. Learn what the U.S. Congress is
contemplating regarding policy and funding on this webinar co-sponsored
by the Alliance and APBP. Caron Whitaker, one of Washington, DC's
leading experts on sustainable transportation, is the Campaign Director
for America Bikes, the coalition of national bicycle and pedestrian
organizations working on the federal transportation bill. She will offer
a briefing you won't want to miss.
Register for this free, one-hour webinar at:
https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/613657738?
If you have any questions, please contact Kit Keller at kit(a)apbp.org.
********
Eloisa Raynault | American Public Health Association | 800 I Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20001 | Transportation, Health and Equity Program Manager
| o: 202-777-2487 | http://www.apha.org/transportation
Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.