Miranda Eg Armstrong, James Garbutt, Tim Jones, Ben Spencer, Ian Philips, Sabina Sanghera, Lesley Welch, Rayne Roberts, Frank de Vocht, Russell Jago, Ruth Salway
{"title":"头盔（电动自行车和电动滑板车对健康的影响）研究：数据收集方法和为评估引入共享租赁计划而收集的信息。","authors":"Miranda Eg Armstrong, James Garbutt, Tim Jones, Ben Spencer, Ian Philips, Sabina Sanghera, Lesley Welch, Rayne Roberts, Frank de Vocht, Russell Jago, Ruth Salway","doi":"10.3310/nihropenres.13857.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to collect information on e-bike and e-scooter use in areas with and without e-bike (EB) and e-bike plus e-scooter (EB+ES) combined share-hire schemes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study employed a repeated cross-sectional design. An online survey asking questions about demographics, travel, and health was completed by people in August and September 2023 before the schemes were launched in Bristol (EB+ES) and Leeds (EB), with Bradford and Sheffield as control sites. A resurvey was conducted at the same sites one year later, but also in Bath (EB+ES) and Plymouth (EB). We also interviewed eight e-bike and e-scooter users and non-users in Bristol (n=4) and Leeds (n=4).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Following data cleaning, 3771 remained in the baseline sample and 5370 remained in the resurvey sample. The majority of participants reported having never used an e-bike (baseline: 61%; resurvey: 69%) or e-scooter (baseline: 77%; resurvey: 84%). At baseline, the most common e-bike access route was the use of their own e-bike (45%), with access via a share-hire scheme lower at 25%. In the resurvey sample, access levels were similar via a share-hire scheme (38%) and personal e-bikes (36%). The most common e-scooter access route was a share-hire scheme (baseline: 60%; resurvey: 74%). The most common weekly e-bike and e-scooter destinations were leisure/leisure venues, followed by work/education and shopping/errands.Half said they would not use an e-bike scheme and 63% indicated they would not use an e-scooter scheme. Potential users were willing to walk ~500 m to access an e-bike/e-scooter.Interviewees generally supported share-hire schemes, seeing them as a good addition to the wider transport offer, but with more support for e-bikes and reservations around e-scooters.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data will be important for a later evaluation of EB and EB+ES share-hire schemes on public health, social, economic, and environmental factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":74312,"journal":{"name":"NIHR open research","volume":"5 ","pages":"44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12188184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Helmet (Health impact of e-bikes and e-scooters) study: Data collection methods and information gathered for the evaluation of the introduction of share hire schemes.\",\"authors\":\"Miranda Eg Armstrong, James Garbutt, Tim Jones, Ben Spencer, Ian Philips, Sabina Sanghera, Lesley Welch, Rayne Roberts, Frank de Vocht, Russell Jago, Ruth Salway\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/nihropenres.13857.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study aimed to collect information on e-bike and e-scooter use in areas with and without e-bike (EB) and e-bike plus e-scooter (EB+ES) combined share-hire schemes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study employed a repeated cross-sectional design. An online survey asking questions about demographics, travel, and health was completed by people in August and September 2023 before the schemes were launched in Bristol (EB+ES) and Leeds (EB), with Bradford and Sheffield as control sites. A resurvey was conducted at the same sites one year later, but also in Bath (EB+ES) and Plymouth (EB). We also interviewed eight e-bike and e-scooter users and non-users in Bristol (n=4) and Leeds (n=4).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Following data cleaning, 3771 remained in the baseline sample and 5370 remained in the resurvey sample. The majority of participants reported having never used an e-bike (baseline: 61%; resurvey: 69%) or e-scooter (baseline: 77%; resurvey: 84%). At baseline, the most common e-bike access route was the use of their own e-bike (45%), with access via a share-hire scheme lower at 25%. In the resurvey sample, access levels were similar via a share-hire scheme (38%) and personal e-bikes (36%). The most common e-scooter access route was a share-hire scheme (baseline: 60%; resurvey: 74%). The most common weekly e-bike and e-scooter destinations were leisure/leisure venues, followed by work/education and shopping/errands.Half said they would not use an e-bike scheme and 63% indicated they would not use an e-scooter scheme. Potential users were willing to walk ~500 m to access an e-bike/e-scooter.Interviewees generally supported share-hire schemes, seeing them as a good addition to the wider transport offer, but with more support for e-bikes and reservations around e-scooters.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data will be important for a later evaluation of EB and EB+ES share-hire schemes on public health, social, economic, and environmental factors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74312,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NIHR open research\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12188184/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NIHR open research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/nihropenres.13857.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NIHR open research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/nihropenres.13857.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Helmet (Health impact of e-bikes and e-scooters) study: Data collection methods and information gathered for the evaluation of the introduction of share hire schemes.
Background: This study aimed to collect information on e-bike and e-scooter use in areas with and without e-bike (EB) and e-bike plus e-scooter (EB+ES) combined share-hire schemes.
Methods: This study employed a repeated cross-sectional design. An online survey asking questions about demographics, travel, and health was completed by people in August and September 2023 before the schemes were launched in Bristol (EB+ES) and Leeds (EB), with Bradford and Sheffield as control sites. A resurvey was conducted at the same sites one year later, but also in Bath (EB+ES) and Plymouth (EB). We also interviewed eight e-bike and e-scooter users and non-users in Bristol (n=4) and Leeds (n=4).
Results: Following data cleaning, 3771 remained in the baseline sample and 5370 remained in the resurvey sample. The majority of participants reported having never used an e-bike (baseline: 61%; resurvey: 69%) or e-scooter (baseline: 77%; resurvey: 84%). At baseline, the most common e-bike access route was the use of their own e-bike (45%), with access via a share-hire scheme lower at 25%. In the resurvey sample, access levels were similar via a share-hire scheme (38%) and personal e-bikes (36%). The most common e-scooter access route was a share-hire scheme (baseline: 60%; resurvey: 74%). The most common weekly e-bike and e-scooter destinations were leisure/leisure venues, followed by work/education and shopping/errands.Half said they would not use an e-bike scheme and 63% indicated they would not use an e-scooter scheme. Potential users were willing to walk ~500 m to access an e-bike/e-scooter.Interviewees generally supported share-hire schemes, seeing them as a good addition to the wider transport offer, but with more support for e-bikes and reservations around e-scooters.
Conclusions: These data will be important for a later evaluation of EB and EB+ES share-hire schemes on public health, social, economic, and environmental factors.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
