Skip to main content

Table 3 Validity of GigaPan® and Google Earth technology in comparison to direct observation for all public amenity categories for street segments in Pittsburgh, PA

From: Validity of environmental audits using GigaPan® and Google Earth Technology

Variable

N

Prevalencea

GigaPan® versus direct observation

Google Earth versus direct observation

Sensitivity

95% CI

Specificity

95% CI

Sensitivity

95% CI

Specificity

95% CI

Garden, flowers, or planter

461

15.6

34.7

(23.9, 46.9)

80.5

(76.2, 84.3)

65.3

(53.1, 76.1)

73.3

(68.6, 77.6)

Public trash can

460

14.8

47.1

(34.8, 59.6)

96.7

(94.4, 98.2)

67.6

(55.2, 78.5)

94.1

(91.3, 96.2)

Bus stop

459

22.0

59.4

(49.2, 69.1)

96.9

(94.6, 98.5)

70.3

(60.4, 79)

95.8

(93.2, 97.6)

Bench/shelter at transit

462

2.8

61.5

(31.6, 86.1)

98.9

(97.4, 99.6)

61.5

(31.6, 86.1)

99.3

(98.1, 99.9)

Benches or other seating

460

1.3

0.0

(0, 45.9)

99.6

(98.4, 99.9)

16.7

(0.4, 64.1)

98.7

(97.1, 99.5)

Bicycle Parking

460

0.7

0.0

(0, 70.8)

99.3

(98.1, 99.9)

33.3

(0.8, 90.6)

98.9

(97.5, 99.6)

Amount street trees

463

32.8

61.8

(53.6, 69.6)

83.3

(78.7, 87.3)

69.7

(61.8, 76.9)

79.7

(74.8, 84.1)

Trees shading sidewalk

461

25.2

41.4

(32.3, 50.9)

89.0

(85.2, 92.1)

56.0

(46.5, 65.2)

89.3

(85.5, 92.3)

  1. Non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals for GigaPan® and Google Earth sensitivity/specificity are in italic
  2. CI confidence interval
  3. aPercentage of segments with attribute, as determined by direct observation audit