posted on 2013-11-22, 00:00authored byEuna Han, Lisa Powell, Sandy Slater, Christopher Quinn
Background: Secondary data are often necessary to assess the availability of commercial physical activity
(PA) facilities and examine its association with individual behaviors and outcomes, yet the validity of such
sources has been explored only in a limited number of studies. Methods: Field data were collected on tbe
presence and attributes of commercial PA facilities in a random sample of 30 urban, 15 suburban, and 15 rural
Census tracts in the Chicago metropolitan statistical area and surrounding area. Results: Approximately 40%
of PA establishments in tbe field data were listed for botb urban and nonurban tracts in both lists except for
nonurban tracts in D&B (35%), which was significantly improved in tbe combined listof D&B and InfoUSA.
Approximately one-quarter of the PA facilities listed in D&B were found on the ground, whereas 40% to
50% of PA facilities listed in InfoUSA were found on the ground. PA establishments that offered instruction
programs or lessons or tbat bad a court or pool were less likely to be listed, particularly in the nonurban tracts.
Conclusions: Secondary commercial business lists on PA facilities should be used witb caution in assessing
the built environment.