Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of proximity and coverage measures of spatial access between traditional fast-food restaurants, non-traditional fast-food outlets, and all fast-food opportunities, using the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test (n = 1,409)

From: Association between proximity to and coverage of traditional fast-food restaurants and non-traditional fast-food outlets and fast-food consumption among rural adults

  Z-statistic P-value
Proximity   
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. non-traditional fast-food outlet 22.99 <0.0001
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. all fast-food opportunities 30.51 <0.0001
   Non-traditional fast-food outlet vs. all fast-food opportunities 14.10 <0.0001
Coverage (≤ 1 mile)   
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. non-traditional fast-food outlet -12.50 <0.0001
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. all fast-food opportunities -25.40 <0.0001
   Non-traditional fast-food outlet vs. all fast-food opportunities -22.49 <0.0001
Coverage (≤ 3 miles)   
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. non-traditional fast-food outlet -1.67 0.094
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. all fast-food opportunities -29.24 <0.0001
   Non-traditional fast-food outlet vs. all fast-food opportunities -25.31 <0.0001
Coverage (≤ 5 miles)   
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. non-traditional fast-food outlet -5.64 <0.0001
   Traditional fast-food restaurant vs. all fast-food opportunities -31.39 <0.0001
   Non-traditional fast-food outlet vs. all fast-food opportunities -27.64 <0.0001
Back to article page

International Journal of Health Geographics

ISSN: 1476-072X