Skip to main content

Table 7 Spatial accessibility to fruits and vegetables by area-level vehicle ownership, using measures of proximity*

From: Neighborhood deprivation, vehicle ownership, and potential spatial access to a variety of fruits and vegetables in a large rural area in Texas

 

Low Vehicle Ownership (n= 35)

Medium Vehicle Ownership (n= 32)

High Vehicle Ownership (n= 34)

SPATIAL ACCESSIBILITY

Proximity, mi

Food stores

   Supermarket

6.4 ± 7.8§ (1.4; 0.3-23.8)

12.4 ± 8.4 (11.6; 0.6-30.9)

11.1 ± 8.2 (10.5; 0.1-33.6)

   Traditional food store

4.1 ± 6.2¶ (1.1; 0.1-23.1)

6.4 ± 7.8 (7.4; 0.6-24.4)

6.4 ± 7.8 (9.1; 0.1-19.0)

Fruits

   Fresh fruits

4.0 ± 5.5§ (1.1; 0.1-19.5)

8.9 ± 6.2 (9.3; 0.8-19.8)

7.3 ± 4.3 (8.0; 0.1-15.1)

   Overall fruits

2.7 ± 4.2¶ (0.9; 0.1-19.5)

4.8 ± 3.3 (4.4; 0.5-12.4)

6.7 ± 4.1 (6.9; 0.1-14.6)

Vegetables

   Fresh vegetables

4.8 ± 6.7§ (1.2; 0.4-23.1)

9.7 ± 6.5 (9.5; 0.8-23.5)

8.1 ± 4.5 (9.3; 0.1-16.3)

   Overall vegetables

2.5 ± 3.9¶ (1.0; 0.1-19.5)

5.3 ± 3.8 (4.5; 0.5-12.9)

5.7 ± 3.8 (5.6; 0.1-14.6)

  1. Area-level (CBG) vehicle ownership (% owner-occupied households): Low = < 90.5%; medium = 90.5-95.4%; high = >95.4%. * Values calculated for each of the CBG (census block group) in the study area (n = 101). Proximity determined by the network distance from each CBG population-weighted centroid to the nearest food store. Distance (proximity) and percentages (mean ± standard deviation, median, and range) by category of vehicle ownership.
  2. Level of statistical significance for test for trend across ordered groups of area = -level vehicle ownership: ‡p < 0.05 §p < 0.01 ¶p < 0.001
Back to article page

International Journal of Health Geographics

ISSN: 1476-072X