{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05361397934868944, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03852263701350278, 'mean_word_length': 5.099273607748184, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The National Study of Neighborhood Parks: Park Use and Physical Activity Levels

Neighborhood parks are important locations for leisure time physical activity (PA) and thereby contribute to population health. Limited objective information exists on the characteristics of who uses neighborhood parks and how active they are in them; a national study of parks using direct observation has never been conducted. PURPOSE: To understand the relationship between park management practices, park characteristics and the use of neighborhood parks for leisure physical activity. METHODS: Trained observers (n=60) used the System for Observing Physical Activity and Recreation in Communities (SOPARC) to assess the use of 3771 activity areas in 174 randomly selected parks in 25 representative US cities with a population over 100,000. Each activity area in every park was observed 3 times/day on 4 days (Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday) during spring and summer 2014. RESULTS: There is tremendous diversity in neighborhood parks within the US, including their size, facilities, amenities, and the people that use them. Park size ranged from 2.2 to 23 acres, served from 601 to 209,966 people within a 1-mile radius (mean =24,165), and had an average of 22 activity areas (range = 3-101). We made over 45,000 activity area visits and observed over 77,000 park users, including children (32%), teens (16%), adults (47%), and seniors (4%). Activity areas were accessible (95%) and usable (97%) most of the time, but rarely equipped (3%), supervised (2%), or organized (3%) and were often empty (76%). Area types were used differentially by gender, age, and race/ethnicity groupings. Most park visitors were male (58%), and they dominated sport facilities and were seen engaging in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) more often than females (40 vs. 34%). Visitors were typically sedentary when observed (62%), and younger people were more likely to engage in MVPA than adults and seniors (children, 46%; teens, 46%; adults, 30%; and seniors, 26%). CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood parks are public resources that can impact PA and health, and this first-ever surveillance study sheds light on how they are used in the US. Areas were frequently unused; strategic planning (e.g., advocacy and programming) might attract more users, especially females and seniors who were underserved. Supported by NHLBI Grant RO1 HL114432 to Dr. Cohen at the RAND Corporation, with collaboration from City Parks Alliance and The Trust for Public Land.