Evaluating the impact of environmental interventions across 2 countries: the International Bikeshare Impacts on Cycling and Collisions Study (IBICCS) Study protocol

BackgroundFew international studies examine public bicycle share programs (PBSP) health impacts. We describe the protocol for the International Bikeshare Impacts on Cycling and Collisions Study (IBICCS).MethodsA quasi-experimental non-equivalent groups design was used. Intervention cities (Montreal, Toronto, Boston, New York and Vancouver) were matched to control cities (Chicago, Detroit, and Philadelphia) on total population, population density, cycling rates, and average yearly temperature. The study used three repeated, cross-sectional surveys in intervention and control cities in Fall 2012 (baseline), 2013 (year 1), and 2014 (year 2). A non-probabilistic online panel survey with a sampling frame of individuals residing in and around areas where PBSP are/would be implemented was used. A total of 12,000 respondents will be sampled. In each of the 8 cities 1000 respondents will be sampled with an additional 4000 respondents sampled based on the total population of the city. Survey questions include measures of self-rated health, and self-reported height and weight, knowledge and experience using PBSP, physical activity, bicycle helmet use and history of collisions and injuries while cycling, socio-demographic questions, and home/workplace locations. Respondents could complete questionnaires in English, French, and Spanish. Two weights will be applied to the data: inverse probability of selection and post-stratification on age and sex.A triple difference analysis will be used. This approach includes in the models, time, exposure, and treatment group, and interaction terms between these variables to estimate changes across time, between exposure groups and between cities.DiscussionThere are scientific and practical challenges in evaluating PBSP. Methodological challenges included: appropriate sample recruitment, exchangeability of treatment and control groups, controlling unmeasured confounding, and specifying exposure. Practical challenges arise in the evaluation of environmental interventions such as a PBSP: one of the companies involved filed for bankruptcy, a Hurricane devastated New York City, and one PBSP was not implemented. Overall, this protocol provides methodological and practical guidance for researchers wanting to study PBSP impacts on health.

[1]  Bruce D. Meyer Natural and Quasi- Experiments in Economics , 1994 .

[2]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Natural experiments: an underused tool for public health? , 2005, Public health.

[3]  Simon Washington,et al.  Bike Share: A Synthesis of the Literature , 2013 .

[4]  Barbara E Ainsworth,et al.  Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity. , 2007, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[5]  T Andersen,et al.  Safety effects of permanent running lights for bicycles: A controlled experiment. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  YI-NAN LIa,et al.  Accident Analysis and Prevention , 2009 .

[7]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public health interventions: design challenges and solutions , 2009, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[8]  D. Scott,et al.  Understanding the Impact of the Modifiable Areal Unit Problem on the Relationship between Active Travel and the Built Environment , 2014 .

[9]  Robert M. Rosenberg,et al.  American Association for Public Opinion Research , 2012 .

[10]  Elizabeth A Stuart,et al.  Propensity score techniques and the assessment of measured covariate balance to test causal associations in psychological research. , 2010, Psychological methods.

[11]  Andi Camden,et al.  Helmet use in BIXI cyclists in Toronto, Canada: an observational study , 2012, BMJ Open.

[12]  B. Ainsworth,et al.  International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. , 2003, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[13]  W. Shadish,et al.  The renaissance of field experimentation in evaluating interventions. , 2009, Annual review of psychology.

[14]  I. White,et al.  Review of inverse probability weighting for dealing with missing data , 2013, Statistical methods in medical research.

[15]  D. Rickles Causality in complex interventions , 2009, Medicine, health care, and philosophy.

[16]  D. Ogilvie,et al.  Interventions to promote cycling: systematic review , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  G. Kalton,et al.  Handling missing data in survey research , 1996, Statistical methods in medical research.

[18]  Daniel Fuller,et al.  The impact of implementing a public bicycle share program on the likelihood of collisions and near misses in Montreal, Canada. , 2013, Preventive medicine.

[19]  Daniel Fuller,et al.  Impact evaluation of a public bicycle share program on cycling: a case example of BIXI in Montreal, Quebec. , 2013, American journal of public health.

[20]  J Thomas,et al.  Alternatives to randomisation in the evaluation of public-health interventions: statistical analysis and causal inference , 2009, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[21]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[22]  S V Subramanian,et al.  Zip code caveat: bias due to spatiotemporal mismatches between zip codes and US census-defined geographic areas--the Public Health Disparities Geocoding Project. , 2002, American journal of public health.

[23]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Using natural experiments to evaluate population health interventions: new Medical Research Council guidance , 2012, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[24]  J. Pucher,et al.  Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: an international review. , 2010, Preventive medicine.

[25]  D. Rubin Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. , 1974 .

[26]  B. Sianesi,et al.  PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing , 2003 .