Skip to main content

Table 4 Spatially structured, spatially unstructured, and total between-neighborhood variations in recreational walking a,b

From: The environmental correlates of overall and neighborhood based recreational walking (a cross-sectional analysis of the RECORD Study)

  IqOR for the spatially unstructured variance (95% CrI) IqOR for the spatially structured variance (95% CrI) IqOR for the total between-neighborhood variance (95% CrI) Percentage of structured variance (95% CrI)
Recreational walking or not    
  Age and sex model 1.56 (1.35, 1.88) 1.77 (1.47, 2.13) 2.07 (1.76, 2.46) 62% (35%, 82%)
  Individual-level model 1.58 (1.36, 1.92) 1.64 (1.36, 1.98) 1.97 (1.67, 2.36) 53% (25%, 78%)
  Environmental model 1.57 (1.36, 1.88) 1.34 (1.20, 1.52) 1.71 (1.48, 2.03) 29% (12%, 54%)
Recreational walking time in the neighborhood    
  Age and sex model 1.52 (1.33, 1.81) 1.85 (1.52, 2.23) 2.12 (1.83, 2.48) 68% (39%, 85%)
  Individual-level model 1.53 (1.34, 1.82) 1.97 (1.67, 2.34) 2.24 (1.95, 2.61) 72% (49%, 86%)
  Environmental model 1.61 (1.39, 1.89) 1.36 (1.20, 1.65) 1.77 (1.53, 2.09) 30% (11%, 60%)
  1. Legend: CrI, credible interval; IqOR, interquartile odds ratio.
  2. aThe first model only included age and sex. The second model further introduced individual sociodemographic variables and weather variables. The third model further included the environmental variables associated with each outcome (see Tables 4 and 5).
  3. bRegarding recreational walking or not, the IqOR of 2.07 for the total between-neighborhood variance in the age and sex model indicates that the 25% of participants living in neighborhoods with the highest odds of recreational walking had 2.07 times larger odds of recreational walking than the 25% of participants residing in neighborhoods with the lowest odds of recreational walking. In the same model, 62% of the total between neighborhood variance was attributable to the spatially structured component of neighborhood variations. When progressively adding covariates to the models, spatially structured variations decreased to a large extent but spatially unstructured variations did not, resulting in a decreasing share of the total between-neighborhood variability that was spatially structured.