Table 1 Area of clusters by method
From: Comparison of spatial scan statistic and spatial filtering in estimating low birth weight clusters
Methods | Filtering Sizes or Maximum Spatial Cluster Sizes (miles) | Significance | Total Area of Shelby County (sq. meter) | Clustered Area (sq. meter) | % of Total Shelby County |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Spatial filtering | 0.40 | ≥ 0.95 level |  | 6,676,687 | 0.32% |
|  | 0.50 | ≥ 0.95 level |  | 27,191,960 | 1.32% |
|  | 0.60 | ≥ 0.95 level |  | 119,492,954 | 5.80% |
SaTScan | 0.40 | P1 (most likely) = 0.002 | Â | 935,139 | 0.05% |
| Â | Â | P2 (secondary) < 0.05 | 2,061,075,094 | 1,523,635 | 0.07% |
| Â | 0.50 | P1 (most likely) = 0.001 | Â | 1,500,352 | 0.07% |
| Â | Â | P2 (secondary) < 0.05 | Â | 2,828,068 | 0.14% |
| Â | 0.60 | P1 (most likely) = 0.001 | Â | 2,344,277 | 0.11% |
| Â | Â | P2 (secondary) < 0.05 | Â | 5,145,388 | 0.25% |