There was no clear trend between month of registration and number of trips made per month during the early months of the BCH scheme. Average usage was, however, over three trips per month higher among individuals registering after the introduction of pay-as-you-go ‘casual’ usage in December

2010, suggesting that once casual use was an option only relatively keen prospective users decided to register. This finding was unchanged in sensitivity analysis using months not individuals as the units of Imatinib analysis in order to take seasonality more fully into account (further details in supplementary material). Having 7-day or annual access was also associated with making more

trips per month. Many of these findings were replicated for our secondary outcome of ‘ever making a BCH trip’ (Table 4). Once again, females were less likely ever to make a trip, while those from outside of London, those living close to a cycle hire docking station, and those with 7-day or annual access were more likely. In contrast to our findings for mean trip usage, however, area deprivation and ethnic composition were not associated with ever making a trip. There was also some evidence that those living in areas of high commuter cycling prevalence were more likely ever find more to make a trip, despite the fact that this variable had not been associated with mean number of trips. This study examined the personal and area-level characteristics of the 100,801 individuals who registered to use the BCH scheme in the first seven months of its operation.

We found that females made up under a third of those registered with BCH, were less likely than males ever to use the scheme after registering, and also made fewer trips found on average. The result was that only 18.4% of all BCH cycling trips were made by females, lower than the proportion of 32.6% reported for all Modulators London cycling trips (Transport for London, 2009). A number of studies have explored the reasons for low uptake of cycling amongst women, citing reasons including perceived cultural inappropriateness, fear of road danger and trip complexity (Dickenson et al., 2003, Garrard et al., 2008, Root and Schintler, 1999 and Steinbach et al., 2011). However as BCH cycling currently appears to be less gender-equitable than non-BCH cycling in London, further exploration is warranted into any specific barriers to registering for and using the scheme. The notable contrast between our findings and the apparently above-average gender equity of the equivalent Montreal cycle hire scheme ( Fuller et al., 2011) also highlights the importance of context specific evaluations of interventions to promote cycling.