Skip to main content

Table 2 Differencesdin health deficits accumulation by traffic density on residential streets (RTD), residential distance to the nearest petrol station and residential distance to a major road among participants in the Seniors-ENRICA cohort: 2008-2010 to 2017

From: Exposure to residential traffic and trajectories of unhealthy ageing: results from a nationally-representative cohort of older adults

Exposure variables

Model 1a

Model 2b

Model 3c

RTD in a 50 m buffer (vehicles/day)

 Q1 (<22)

Ref.

Ref.

Ref.

 Q2 (22-58)

0.18 (-0.33, 0.69)

0.28 (-0.22, 0.78)

1.51 ( 0.50, 2.53)

 Q3 (59-189)

0.22 (-0.32, 0.75)

0.28 (-0.24, 0.80)

0.98 (-0.05, 2.01)

 Q4 (189-592)

0.49 (-0.04, 1.02)

0.64 ( 0.13, 1.16)

2.20 ( 1.18, 3.21)

 Q5 (≥592)

0.53 ( 0.00, 1.07)

0.67 ( 0.14, 1.20)

1.98 ( 0.90, 3.05)

p-trende

0.046

0.014

0.002

Per-iqr

0.58 (0.63, 1.13)

0.69 (0.15, 1.23)

0.71 (0.16,1.25)

RTD in a 100 m buffer (vehicles/day)

 Q1 (<145)

Ref.

Ref.

Ref.

 Q2 (146-286)

0.03 (-0.49, 0.54)

0.04 (-0.45, 0.54)

0.04 (-0.47, 0.55)

 Q3 (287-1262)

-0.13 (-0.66, 0.40)

-0.12 (-0.65, 0.40)

-0.08 (-0.62, 0.46)

 Q4 (1262-2144)

0.67 ( 0.14, 1.19)

0.71 ( 0.20, 1.22)

0.67 ( 0.14, 1.19)

 Q5 (≥2145)

0.17 (-0.39, 0.73)

0.23 (-0.32, 0.79)

0.27 (-0.29, 0.84)

p-trende

0.228

0.137

0.137

Per-iqr

0.64 (-0.17, 1.44)

0.70 (0.01, 1.58)

0.783 (0.02, 1.64)

Distance to petrol station (meters)

 Q1 (<365)

Ref.

Ref.

Ref.

 Q2 (365-540)

-0.64 (-1.21, -0.07)

-0.60 (-1.16, -0.04)

-0.57 (-1.14, -0.01)

 Q3 (541-750)

-0.74 (-1.31, -0.17)

-0.67 (-1.22, -0.02)

-0.66 (-1.21, -0.11)

 Q4 (751-1114)

-0.50 ( -1.07, 0.07)

-0.45 ( -1.00, 0.11)

-0.43 ( -0.99, 0.13)

 Q5 (≥1115)

-0.92 (-1.47, -0.38)

-0.92 (-1.45, -0.40)

-0.91 (-1.44, -0.39)

p-trende

0.008

0.004

0.005

Per-iqr

-1.66 (-3.13, -0.19)

-1.81 (-3.21, -0.41)

-1.80 (-3.21, -0.40)

Distance to major road (meters)

 Q1 (<544)

Ref.

Ref.

Ref.

 Q2 (545-993)

-0.51 (-1.01, -0.01)

-0.43 (-0.92, 0.07)

-0.43 (-0.92, 0.06)

 Q3 (994-1552)

-0.23 (-0.75, 0.28)

-0.18 (-0.69, 0.33)

-0.19 (-0.70, 0.32)

 Q4 (1553-2460)

0.08 (-0.45, 0.62)

0.16 (-0.36, 0.68)

0.16 (-0.36, 0.68)

 Q5 (≥2461)

-0.28 (-0.80, 0.24)

-0.29 (-0.81, 0.23)

-0.26 (-0.78, 0.26)

p-trende

0.883

0.747

0.740

 

0.27 (-0.81, 1.36)

0.29 (-0.78, 1.37)

0.28 (-0.82, 1.38)

  1. aModel 1 was adjusted for age (restricted quadratic splines with knots at 65, 70, 75, and 80 years), sex (men or women), educational level (primary or less, secondary, or university), SDI, and baseline levels of deficits accumulation index (restricted quadratic splines with knots at 10, 20, and 30%).
  2. bModel 2 was further adjusted for baseline and current lifestyle variables: smoking status (never, former, or current), alcohol drinking (never, former, or current), Mediterranean diet score (≤ 5, 6, 7, 8, or ≥ 9 points), body mass index (< 25, 25–29.9, or ≥ 30 kg/m2), recreational physical activity (METS-h/week), and television viewing time (hours/day).)
  3. cModel 3 was further adjusted for the corresponding exposure variable (RTD in the case of distance to petrol station, and vice versa), for residential tree canopy and percentage of artificial blue spaces within the corresponding buffer (50 or 100 meters)
  4. dAverage differences in deficits accumulation index at each follow-up visit and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by category of traffic exposure variable
  5. eTests for linear trend included an ordinal variable with the median of the corresponding quintile for each exposure variable
Back to article page

Environmental Health

ISSN: 1476-069X