{"title":"The value of cycleways to improve population physical activity levels: a systematic review of economic evaluations.","authors":"Luiz F Andrade, Bisola Osifowora, Emma Frew","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2542289","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Active travel (AT), particularly cycling, is increasingly recognized as a public health strategy to promote physical activity and prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Given the substantial investments required to build cycling infrastructure, economic evaluations are essential to inform policy and efficient funding decisions. This systematic review aims to identify and assess economic evaluations of cycleway infrastructure, with particular emphasis on the methodological approaches employed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using databases including PubMed, EconLit, Business Source Premier, CINAHL Plus, and MEDLINE. Eligible studies focused on cycling-specific infrastructure, reported both costs and benefits, and included a comparator. Data were extracted on evaluation type, costs, benefits, perspective, and time horizon. Study quality was assessed using the Drummond checklist, and findings were synthesized narratively, following PRISMA guidelines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, using cost-benefit analysis or cost-effectiveness analysis. Interventions ranged from single cycle tracks to complex networks. Most studies were hypothetical and relied on secondary data and modeling assumptions. All reported positive economic returns. Equity impacts were rarely considered, and substantial methodological variability was observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cycling infrastructure appears to demonstrate economic value for society. However, methodological inconsistencies and data limitations remain considerable and limit comparability and generalizability of findings.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>PROSPERO Protocol:(CRD420251005334).</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1183-1194"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2542289","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Active travel (AT), particularly cycling, is increasingly recognized as a public health strategy to promote physical activity and prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Given the substantial investments required to build cycling infrastructure, economic evaluations are essential to inform policy and efficient funding decisions. This systematic review aims to identify and assess economic evaluations of cycleway infrastructure, with particular emphasis on the methodological approaches employed.
Methods: A systematic review was conducted using databases including PubMed, EconLit, Business Source Premier, CINAHL Plus, and MEDLINE. Eligible studies focused on cycling-specific infrastructure, reported both costs and benefits, and included a comparator. Data were extracted on evaluation type, costs, benefits, perspective, and time horizon. Study quality was assessed using the Drummond checklist, and findings were synthesized narratively, following PRISMA guidelines.
Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, using cost-benefit analysis or cost-effectiveness analysis. Interventions ranged from single cycle tracks to complex networks. Most studies were hypothetical and relied on secondary data and modeling assumptions. All reported positive economic returns. Equity impacts were rarely considered, and substantial methodological variability was observed.
Conclusion: Cycling infrastructure appears to demonstrate economic value for society. However, methodological inconsistencies and data limitations remain considerable and limit comparability and generalizability of findings.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.