Introduction
Urban mobility can detrimentally impact city dwellers' health and quality of life, e.g. through air pollution, noise and traffic injuries, but offers opportunities for health promotion, e.g., through active travel. While the health impacts of transport are well known, the extent to which health is considered in mobility plans is less obvious. The European Commission encourages cities to develop Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) to improve residents’ quality of life. We assess how health is addressed in SUMPs by examining: i) key health and health equity terminology, ii) explicit transport pathways to health, iii) health targets and key performance indicators, and iv) the health-rationale of actions and measures.

Methods
Using a customised health dictionary, we perform a quantitative text analysis of SUMPs issued from 2006 to 2023 (n = 230) from 31 European countries listed on the European Local Transport Information Service (Eltis) City Database. We further validate this by an in-depth qualitative analysis of a purposive sub-sample (n = 13).

Results
The findings show that while the prominence of health in SUMPs seems to be increasing, the link between transport and equity, and social and mental wellbeing is not frequently discussed. Detailed targets and KPIs for several health pathways are scarce or missing, as are the health rationale and health outcomes for proposed measures. Overwhelmingly SUMPs’ health aspirations focus on minimising detrimental health impacts of transport, primarily from traffic injuries and to a lesser extent from air pollution. Health related concepts such as accessibility and active travel feature prominently but are not explicitly identified as an opportunity to enhance health.

Conclusion
Urban mobility planning across Europe seems to miss an opportunity to embrace mobility as a driver of health promotion.@en

Despite the proven effectiveness of seatbelt use in reducing traffic casualties, not wearing a seatbelt still contributes to a substantial proportion of fatal crashes worldwide. This problem has raised the need to better understand factors contributing to seatbelt use, particularly in multi-occupant vehicles. Among these factors, behavioural determinants of seatbelt use are difficult to measure and their data are not readily available. These behavioural factors may have shared influences on vehicle occupants, causing their seatbelt use choices to be correlated. These complexities have prevented a comprehensive understanding of seatbelt use choices in the literature. This study aims to fill this gap by developing an econometric model that explains seatbelt use choices in multi-occupant vehicles. A set of binary logit models are constructed for seatbelt use choices and their utilities are correlated across vehicle occupants. A new latent variable representing the unobserved factors or ‘atmosphere’ of the vehicle is then incorporated into the model. The model is empirically tested using seatbelt use data from Tennessee, United States. Results indicate that vehicle body type and time of the day are significantly associated with seatbelt use. In addition, the collective seatbelt use in a vehicle is influenced by the unobserved atmosphere in the vehicle. Age, alcohol and drug consumption, higher proportion of old population and white racial mix, higher income per capita, and higher education levels are factors contributing to this latent atmosphere.@en