Self-selection into residential neighbourhoods is a widely acknowledged, but under-studied problem in research investigating neighbourhood influences on physical activity and diet. Failure to handle neighbourhood self-selection can lead to biased estimates of the association between the neighbourhood environment and behaviour. This means that effects could be over- or under-estimated, both of which have implications for public health policies related to neighbourhood (re)design. Therefore, it is important that methods to deal with neighbourhood self-selection are identified and reviewed. The aim of this review was to assess how neighbourhood self-selection is conceived and accounted for in the literature. Articles from a systematic search undertaken in 2017 were included if they examined associations between neighbourhood environment exposures and adult physical activity or dietary behaviour. Exposures could include any objective measurement of the built (e.g., supermarkets), natural (e.g., parks) or social (e.g., crime) environment. Articles had to explicitly state that a given method was used to account for neighbourhood self-selection. The systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (number CRD42018083593) and was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of 31 eligible articles, almost all considered physical activity (30/31); few examined diet (2/31). Methods used to address neighbourhood self-selection varied. Most studies (23/31) accounted for items relating to participants’ neighbourhood preferences or reasons for moving to the neighbourhood using multi-variable adjustment in regression models (20/23) or propensity scores (3/23). Of 11 longitudinal studies, three controlled for neighbourhood self-selection as an unmeasured confounder using fixed effects regression. Most studies accounted for neighbourhood self-selection by adjusting for measured attributes of neighbourhood preference. However, commonly the impact of adjustment could not be assessed. Future studies using adjustment should provide estimates of associations with and without adjustment for self-selection; consider temporality in the measurement of self-selection variables relative to the timing of the environmental exposure and outcome behaviours; and consider the theoretical plausibility of presumed pathways in cross-sectional research where causal direction is impossible to establish.

中文翻译：

---

体育活动和饮食行为研究中邻里自我选择的解释方法：系统综述。

在居民区中进行自我选择是公认的，但在研究社区对体育锻炼和饮食的影响的研究中，这个问题尚未得到充分研究。无法处理邻域自我选择会导致对邻域环境与行为之间关联的估计有偏差。这意味着影响可能被高估或低估，这两者都会对与邻里（重新）设计有关的公共卫生政策产生影响。因此，重要的是识别和审查处理邻居自选的方法。本文的目的是评估文献中如何构想和解释邻里自我选择。如果他们研究了邻里环境暴露与成人身体活动或饮食行为之间的关联，则包括2017年进行的系统搜索中的文章。暴露可以包括对建筑（如超级市场），自然（如公园）或社会（如犯罪）环境的任何客观测量。文章必须明确声明使用给定的方法来说明邻域的自我选择。该系统评价已在PROSPERO国际系统评价前瞻性登记册中注册（编号CRD42018083593），并根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目（PRISMA）声明进行。在31篇符合条件的文章中，几乎所有的体育锻炼都被视为（30/31）；很少检查饮食（2/31）。解决邻居自选问题的方法多种多样。大多数研究（23/31）使用回归模型（20/23）或倾向得分（3/23）中的多变量调整来解释与参与者的邻里偏好或迁至邻里的原因有关的项目。在11项纵向研究中，有3项使用固定效应回归法作为未测混杂因素，控制了邻里自我选择。大多数研究都是通过调整邻域偏好的测量属性来解决邻域自我选择的。但是，通常无法评估调整的影响。未来使用调整的研究应提供对自我选择进行调整和不进行调整的关联估计；考虑与环境暴露和结果行为的时间有关的自我选择变量的度量中的时间性；并在无法确定因果关系的横截面研究中考虑假定途径的理论上的合理性。