TRBHealth

trbhealth@mailman.chrispy.net

1153 discussions

Re: [H+T--Friends] H+T--Friends Digest, Vol 9, Issue 10

by Chad Spoon

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 *******************************************

14 years, 1 month

[H+T--Friends] Health economic assessment tools (HEAT) for walking and cycling

by Jason Meggs

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 >

14 years, 1 month

[H+T--Friends] Out of the office

by Megan Wier

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!

14 years, 1 month

[H+T--Friends] More on Car Travel and Health

by Ed Christopher

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)

14 years, 1 month

[H+T--Friends] New TRB information on trbhealth.org

by Carolyn McAndrews

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

14 years, 1 month

[H+T--Friends] Out of the office

by Megan Wier

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!

14 years, 2 months

[H+T--Friends] Research Problem Statement -Air Quality, Public Health Studies related to Airports

by Ellin Reisner

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

14 years, 2 months

[H+T--Friends] Free federal transportation webinar next week

by Eloisa Raynault

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.

14 years, 2 months

[H+T--Friends] APHA Annual Meeting: Call for abstracts now open

by Eloisa Raynault

Happy new year, everyone! The 2012 Call for Abstracts for the American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting is NOW OPEN! The 2012 Theme is Prevention and Wellness Across the Lifespan and the Annual Meeting will be held from October 27 through October 31, 2012 in San Francisco, CA. For more information on the call for abstracts, visit the main page at http://apha.confex.com/apha/140am/oasys.epl The deadline for submission of abstracts range from February 6 thru February 10, 2012 depending on the Section, SPIG, Caucus or Forum to which you wish to submit. All submissions will end at 11:59 pm (Pacific Standard Time) on the due date listed on the Call for Abstracts. The APHA Scientific Sessions are developed from abstracts that are submitted to APHA Sections, SPIGs, Caucuses, Forums and the Student Assembly during the abstract submission process. Papers must present new information or viewpoints not previously published or presented. The acknowledged author must be listed or, in the case of a group, the chairperson must be listed as the author. Papers presented at the Annual Meeting remain the property of the author. While you do not need to be an APHA member to submit an abstract, presenters whose papers are accepted must be individual members of APHA to present their paper(s) at this meeting. Session organizers, moderators and presenters are required to pay the appropriate registration fee (full or one-day). All presenters must be registered by the Advanced Registration Deadline. If you are unsure where your presentation would best fit in the program, visit this website: http://apha.confex.com/apha/140am/sessiontitlesearch.cgi?action=showResu lts (and note that transportation comes up in several areas). Cheers, Eloisa 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 <http://www.apha.org/transportation> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

14 years, 2 months

[H+T--Friends] Communications survey WITH LINK: two days left

by Carolyn McAndrews

Dear friends and colleagues, Please take the TRB Health and Transportation Subcommittee communications survey if you have not already. We would like to learn from you how you prefer to communicate with and receive information from the subcommittee, and your responses will help us be a better resource to you. This is the link to the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/HFFZS6W Thanks to all who have responded already; we appreciate your time and thoughts. We will take the survey down on Wednesday, January 4 -- so there are only two days left! Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have about this. Best, Carey Carolyn McAndrews Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Health and Society Scholar University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Dept of Population Health Sciences 707 WARF, 610 Walnut Madison, WI 53726 (608) 265-2643 cmcandrews(a)wisc.edu

14 years, 2 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

TRBHealth