Research Article

A Combined Impact-Process Evaluation of a Program Promoting Active Transport to School: Understanding the Factors That Shaped Program Effectiveness

Table 4

Predictor variables for active transport to school, parent-reported baseline data.


 Variable
Student use of active transport
  
No active transport
(no trips)
(%)
Active transport
(1–10 trips)
(%)

School location
 Regional112 (40.3)166 (59.7)0.050
 Metropolitan40 (30.3)92 (69.7)
Child gender
 Male70 (37.0)119 (63.0)0.952
 Female81 (37.3)136 (62.7)
Child grade
 Grade 459 (48.8)62 (51.2)0.007
 Grade 544 (32.6)91 (67.4)
 Grade 648 (32.0)102 (68.0)
Distance to school
 Less than 0.5 km3 (4.7)61 (95.3)
 0.5–1 km7 (8.5)75 (91.5)
 1.1–2 km30 (29.1)73 (70.9)0.000
 2.1–4 km33 (47.1)37 (52.9)
 4.1–10 km47 (82.5)10 (17.5)
 More than 10 km27 (100.0)0 (0.0)
Number of children in household
 One20 (32.3)42 (67.7)
 Two68 (34.7)128 (65.3)0.405
 Three47 (43.1)62 (56.9)
 Four or more17 (39.5)26 (60.5)
Number of cars per adult in household**
 None0 (0.0)11 (100.0)0.001
 One130 (36.0)231 (64.0)
 Two22 (59.5)15 (40.5)
Parent’s country of birth
 Australia130 (37.6)216 (62.4)0.521
 Overseas21 (33.3)42 (66.7)
Parent education
 No qualification since secondary school58 (40.0)87 (60.0)0.364
 Vocational qualification or higher90 (35.4)164 (64.6)
Parent employment
 Both parents work full-time43 (39.8)65 (60.2)0.492
 At least one parent works part-time or is not employed109 (36.1)258 (62.9)
How often parent cycles
 Once per month or less126 (39.4)194 (60.6)0.069
 At least once per week26 (28.9)64 (71.1)
How often spouse/partner cycles
 No spouse or partner/once per month or less133 (40.3)197 (59.7)0.011
 At least once per week19 (24.7)58 (75.3)
Walking to or from school on a regular basis is a possibility for child
 No100 (83.3)20 (16.7)0.000
 Yes/maybe51 (17.7)237 (82.3)
Cycling to or from school on a regular basis is a possibility for child
 No89 (64.0)50 (36.0)0.000
 Yes/maybe61 (23.1)203 (76.9)

Number of students.
**0.5 cars were rounded up to one.
Bold: .