Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 7 Absolute difference in measures to closest delivery facility calculated from compound compared to measures calculated from village centroid, n = 9,306 births

From: Methods to measure potential spatial access to delivery care in low- and middle-income countries: a case study in rural Ghana

Distance to closest delivery facility1 Mean (SD) Median (IQR) 90% 95% Range
Euclidean (km) 0.25 (0.24) 0.18 (0.08-0.34) 0.57 0.74 8.34E-06 - 2.64
Network distance (km) 0.38 (0.35) 0.28 (0.13-0.52) 0.84 1.11 0.000098 - 2.87
Mechanized network time (hr) 0.092 (0.10) 0.057 (0.025-0.12) 0.22 0.31 5.66E-07 - 0.74
Non-mechanized network time (hr) 0.13 (0.12) 0.09 (0.041-0.17) 0.30 0.39 0.000041 - 0.85
Mechanized raster time (hr) 0.17 (0.23) 0.16 (0.0042-0.18) 0.46 0.57 0 - 2.22
Non-mechanized raster time (hr) 0.20 (0.25) 0.13 (0.50-0.24) 0.48 0.69 0 - 2.42
Distance to closest CEmOC 2 Mean (SD) Median (IQR) 90 % 95 % Range
Euclidean (km) 0.30 (0.31) 0.20 (0.09-0.41) 0.69 0.96 0.000094 - 2.94
Network distance (km) 0.46 (0.48) 0.30 (0.13-0.63) 1.12 1.48 9.54E-06 - 3.21
Mechanized network time (hr) 0.083 (0.089) 0.055 (0.024-0.11) 0.20 0.26 8.94E-07 - 0.69
Non-mechanized network time (hr) 0.14 (0.14) 0.10 (0.013-0.19) 0.35 0.46 3.48E-05 - 0.94
Mechanized raster time (hr) 0.18 (0.25) 0.16 (0.005-0.18) 0.50 0.68 0 - 2.22
Non-mechanized raster time (hr) 0.23 (0.27) 0.15 (0.050-0.30) 0.58 0.79 0 - 2.04
  1. 1n=64 delivery facilities; 2n=8 CEmOC facilities.