Objectives: This article explores how the building-scale built environment is associated with selfrated health, examining differences in this association among younger, middle-aged, and older age groups. Features examined included building type, building condition, and sidewalk presence in front of dwellings. Background: Understanding how the relationships between built environments and health vary across age groups helps to build a healthy environment for all. However, most studies have concentrated on the neighborhood or indoor environment, rather than whole buildings, and few have compared age groups. Methods: This study analyzed survey data from 1,019 adults living in 40 neighborhoods in Chengdu, China, recruited through a clustered random sampling approach. It used a Bayesian logistic mixed-effects model with interaction terms between age-group indicators and other variables. Results: Significant differences exist in the relationships of self-rated health with some environmental and other indicators among age groups. For older people, living in multi-floor buildings, having a household smoker, and undertaking fewer hours of weekly exercise were associated with lower odds of reporting good, very good, or excellent health. These relationships were not identified among middle-aged and younger people. More education was associated with higher odds of reporting better health among older and middle-aged groups. Conclusions: Older people experience more health-related challenges compared to middle-aged and younger people. However, among the examined built environment factors, building type was the only significant factor related to self-rated health among older people. To promote health among older people, this study recommends adding elevators in the multi-floor buildings.
Health Environments Research & Design Journal
Sage Publications, Inc.
Lyu, Y., Forsyth, A., & Worthington, S. (2021). Built Environment and Self-Rated Health: Comparing Young, Middle-Aged, and Older People in Chengdu, China. Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 14(3), 229-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1937586720982566