Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Spearman’s rank correlations between LSOA (n = 1656) density and proximity measures*

From: Creating ‘obesogenic realities’; do our methodological choices make a difference when measuring the food environment?

   Density Proximity
   (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Density Per 1000 population (1) 1.000 0.831 0.549 0.354 0.299 0.494 0.474 0.434 0.512a 0.478 a
  Per km2 (2)   1.000 0.658 0.534 0.512 0.575 0.584 0.570 0.640 a 0.579 a
Per 400m Euclidean buffer (3)    1.000 0.653 0.586 0.667 0.764 0.718 0.720 a 0.674 a
Per 800m Euclidean buffer (4)     1.000 0.926 0.445 0.769 0.854 0.474 a 0.474 a
Per 1000m Euclidean buffer (5)      1.000 0.411 0.695 0.783 0.442 a 0.442 a
Per 400m street network buffer (6)       1.000 0.610 0.550 0.751 a 0.844 a
Per 800m street network buffer (7)        1.000 0.918 0.589 a 0.657 a
Per 1000m street network buffer (8)         1.000 0.543 a 0.593 a
Proximity Euclidean distance (9)          1.000 0.865
Street network distance (10)           1.000
  1. * All results p < 0.001.
  2. a Inverse of correlation co-efficients presented to aid interpretation between, for example, greater density (higher exposure) and greater proximity (lower exposure).