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