## 4 Discussion

Table 3: Crude and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of the perception of the effect of neighbourhood characteristics on chronic diseases and lifestyle risk factors. the neighbourhood and built environment characteristics (e.g., a variety of play areas and recreational facilities) are associated with PA levels [25; 26]. Research [24] has demonstrated that more comfortable public facilities can increase PA levels. A meta-analysis showed that high levels of leisure-time PA compared to low PA resulted in a protective effect against general, haemorrhagic, and ischemic stroke [25]. A study from the Netherlands [27] highlighted that a low feeling of safety was associated with poorer self-rated health at the individual and neighbourhood levels. Crime issues in neighbourhoods with high poverty hamper women and adults' use of parks without footpaths [28]. A longitudinal representative cohort study [29] discovered that perceived measurements of the local residential environment were related to metabolic syndrome in Australia. Another study [26] found a protective effect of walkable neighbourhoods on obesity-related outcomes. A longitudinal study [30] showed that a perceived lack of access to local amenities decreased levels of PA and walking and affected the increase in BMI, thereby increasing the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Subjective environmental and perception analyses have been applied in different countries, and the studied indicators vary. For example, a study in China [24] brought about the following factors for research: dwelling environment, public facilities convenience, public security, and neighbourhood relationships. A study from the Netherlands [27] singled out two factors: social and physical environment. Research in North Carolina [31] used the following factors with a 5-point Likert-response format: aesthetics, walkability, safety, and social cohesion. A study on perceived residential environment quality in Italy [32] presented instruments measuring the inhabitants' perceived quality of their neighbourhood in urban places, which consisted of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment indicators. The evaluation included spatial aspects (architectural planning space and organisation and accessibility of space), human aspects (people and social relations), functional aspects (welfare, recreational, commercial, and transportation services), and contextual aspects (pace of life and environmental health). Some studies included problems in the neighbourhood related to crime, traffic, rubbish [33], and GIS-based metrics [34] to investigate the associations between the perceived neighbourhood environment and health. The environmental factors revealed in the current research complement the previously unknown subjective perceptions of the neighbourhood environment among urban residents and, at the same time, are in line with previous studies. Our findings may apply to other urban areas, especially identifying inequalities in urban health risks [16]. Our models were carefully adjusted for important individual demographic, behavioural, and socioeconomic variables. Each covariate was selected singly for the model, minimising the risk of confounding. The present study makes an important contribution by investigating the associations between perceived neighbourhood environment factors and urban residents' health. It is important to have a comprehensive tool for the assessment of subjective perceptions of the neighbourhood environment, including all the neighbourhood environment characteristics, as well as urban design elements and psychological aspects, and their effects on subjective health and well-being. The creation of a healthy and harmonious neighbourhood environment for citizens, taking into account the most important factors that determine satisfaction and positive perception of their living environment, is considered to be one of the main goals in improving health and well-being.