Skip to main content

Table 2 Land use features for street segments

From: Virtual audits of the urban streetscape: comparing the inter-rater reliability of GigaPan® to Google Street View

Features N PR PA Cohen’s kappa PABAK
GP GSV GP (%) GSV (%) GP 95% CI GSV 95% CI GP 95% CI GSV 95% CI
Detached housing 106 0.50 0.59 74 76 0.58 [0.44, 0.71] 0.64 [0.52, 0.77] 0.60 [0.48, 0.73] 0.65 [0.52, 0.77]
Institutional 106 0.13 0.18 90 91 0.54 [0.30, 0.79] 0.69 [0.52, 0.87] 0.84 [0.76, 0.93] 0.86 [0.77, 0.94]
Broken/boarded windows* 105 0.22 0.35 81 80 0.45 [0.25, 0.65] 0.56 [0.39, 0.73] 0.62 [0.47, 0.77] 0.60 [0.44, 0.76]
Attached housing 105 0.20 0.30 80 77 0.41 [0.21, 0.60] 0.50 [0.38, 0.58] 0.70 [0.58, 0.82] 0.66 [0.53, 0.78]
Trees that shade sidewalk 105 0.17 0.32 82 67 0.37 [0.17, 0.57] 0.31 [0.17, 0.46] 0.73 [0.62, 0.84] 0.50 [0.36, 0.64]
Amount of street trees 106 0.38 0.45 63 59 0.33 [0.18, 0.48] 0.33 [0.20, 0.47] 0.45 [0.31, 0.59] 0.39 [0.25, 0.53]
Bars on the windows* 105 0.19 0.20 76 82 0.26 [0.08, 0.45] 0.43 [0.22, 0.64] 0.52 [0.36, 0.69] 0.64 [0.49, 0.79]
Slope of the segment 106 0.17 0.14 75 83 0.19 [0.01, 0.38] 0.30 [0.09, 0.52] 0.63 [0.51, 0.76] 0.75 [0.64, 0.85]
Vacant building/Lot 106 0.30 0.45 58 57 0.13 [0.06, 0.27] 0.25 [0.10, 0.40] 0.38 [0.23, 0.52] 0.35 [0.21, 0.49]
Housing apartments 106 0.16 0.20 75 75 0.15 [−0.02, 0.33] 0.24 [0.06, 0.41] 0.63 [0.51, 0.76] 0.62 [0.49, 0.74]
  1. PR average prevalence, PA percent agreement, GP GigaPan®, GSV Google Street View, CI confidence interval, PABAK prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa. An * denotes the variable was dichotomous. All other variables not denoted with * were recoded to be dichotomous solely when calculating prevalence. Significant differences across audit tools are italicized.
\