Skip to main content

Table 3 Associations between previous cycle training and children’s cycling behaviour across the study population (N = 3336)

From: Impact of offering cycle training in schools upon cycling behaviour: a natural experimental study

Outcome

Whether child had done cycle training

Percentage (95 % CI)

Unadjusted analysis (risk ratio, 95 % CI)

Adjusted analysis (risk ratio, 95 % CI)

Child cycles at least once a week

Untrained

41.5 (38.9, 44.2)

1

1

Trained

55.0 (52.8, 57.2)

1.27 (1.17, 1.39)

1.26 (1.16, 1.37)

Child ever cycles

Untrained

73.0 (70.6, 75.4)

1

1

Trained

92.7 (91.4, 93.8)

1.23 (1.18, 1.28)

1.20 (1.15, 1.25)

Child usually travels to school by bike

Untrained

1.9 (1.2, 2.8)

1

1

Trained

3.4 (2.7, 4.3)

1.62 (0.99, 2.67)

1.38 (0.83, 2.29)

Child makes local bike trips independentlya

Untrained

43.3 (40.6, 45.9)

1

1

Trained

56.7 (54.5, 58.9)

1.23 (1.13, 1.34)

1.21 (1.11, 1.32)

  1. All p < 0.001 for association. Analyses based on our study population of 3336 children, of whom 1378 were untrained, 1956 trained and 2 had missing data (imputed using multiple imputation). Adjusted analyses adjusted for all variables shown in Table 1 (with the local prevalence of cycling to work entered as a continuous variable), and also for the region of England that the child lived in and the season of data collection
  2. CI confidence interval
  3. a Defined as ever making local, non-school bicycle trips without an adult, either on their own or with other children