Of the 15,672 participants recruited in the initial survey, we excluded four who did not have a valid postcode that allowed their residential location to be determined. We also excluded a small number of participants (n=32) who had moved far from the study area by the time of the follow-up. A total of 15,636 individuals were included in the analysis with a mean age of 62 years at our baseline. The average length of follow-up was 7.5 years. Our sample therefore represent a cohort that were starting to reach older age in the UK, where state pensionable age was 60 years for women and 65 years for men, at the time of survey (now 63 years for women) (Gov.uk, 2016). There were statistically significant differences (P<0.001) between participant characteristics and quartile of greenspace in terms of age, social class, neighbourhood deprivation, marital status, mobility limitations, dog ownership and walkers, and the urban/rural nature of the home location (Table 1). The larger magnitude of differences were observed for those with professional and managerial occupations, for those who were married, for people owning and walking dogs, for people living in affluent areas, and for people living in urban versus rural locations. Of the total sample, we know that 393 people (2.5%) had moved house by the time of follow-up.Table 1Baseline characteristics of participants in EPIC Norfolk, according to percentage of greenspace (least green 25% and most green 25%) in their home neighbourhood.Table 1.CharacteristicAllLeast green 25%Most green 25%Difference, least and most green*PAge at baseline (years)62.2±9.1 (15,632)62.6±9.1 (3909)61.2±9.0 (3908)1.4<0.001Waist/hip ratio0.85±0.09 (14,848)0.85±0.09 (3647)0.85±0.09 (3726)0.00.558BMI (kg/m2)26.7±4.0 (15,464)26.7±4.1 (3878)26.6±3.9 (3875)0.10.374Social class (count)<0.001 Professional7.4 (1134)6.8 (260)8.2 (314)1.4 Managerial38.8 (5951)34.6 (1322)46.2 (1170)11.6 Skilled non manual16.7 (2559)17.3 (660)13.2 (504)4.1 Skilled manual21.5 (3303)24.1 (923)18.5 (710)5.6 Semi-skilled12.6 (1929)13.3 (507)11.6 (443)1.7 Unskilled3.1 (479)3.9 (150)2.4 (91)1.5Neighbourhood deprivation (count)<0.001 Relatively affluent85.1 (13,299)67.3 (2632)95.7 (3741)28.4 Relatively deprived14.9 (2337)32.7 (1279)4.3 (168)28.4Marital status (count)<0.001 Single4.3 (662)5.9 (231)3.5 (137)2.4 Married79.9 (12,429)74.2 (2882)84.5 (3284)10.3 Separated or divorced6.5 (1009)9.1 (352)4.8 (185)4.3 Widowed9.4 (1455)10.8 (418)7.2 (31)3.6Mobility: limited walking half a mile (count)0.001 Yes (a lot)9.1 (1115)10.2 (306)7.9 (248)2.3 Yes (limited)12.5 (1532)13.3 (397)11.8 (369)1.5 No78.4 (9617)76.5 (2285)80.3 (2517)3.8 Dog owners (count)18.4 (1992)11.9 (317)28.7 (780)16.8<0.001Dog walking (count)<0.001 Not applicable, don’t own a dog77.9 (8427)83.3 (2212)68.2 (1853)15.0 Never4.4 (475)4.6 (123)5.0 (137)0.4 Sometimes, but not every day5.6 (606)3.8 (100)8.0 (218)4.3 Once a day6.3 (687)4.9 (130)9.6 (261)4.7 More than once a day5.8 (628)3.5 (92)9.1 (247)5.6Urban/rural location (count)<0.001 Urban45.3 (7079)81.5 (3188)0.3 (12)81.2 Town and fringe22.3 (3483)14.5 (567)2.3 (90)12.2 Village23.3 (3649)2.5 (98)69.3 (2707)66.7 Hamlet/isolated dwelling9.1 (1425)1.5 (58)28.1 (1100)26.7Greenspace (%)56.6 (31.4)15.2 (9.1)95.7 (3.5)80.5Results are % or mean±SD (n). *P-values from ANOVA and chi square, testing for significant differences between all four quartiles of greenspace and each characteristic.