Table 4 Individual variable and composite scores by store type
Variable | Premium supermarket | Large supermarket | Discount supermarket | Small supermarket | ‘World’ store | Convenience store | Petrol store | Possible range f |  | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Median (IQR) d | Min | Max | p-value | |||||||
Composite score | 1.7 | 1.7 | 0.3 | 0.9 | -.04 | -0.6 | -0.9 | -1.9 | 2.2 | <0.001a |
(1.2 to 1.8) | (1.5 to 1.9) | (0.1 to 1.0) | (0.6 to 1.1) | (-1.1 to 0.3) | (-1.0 to 0.2) | (-1.2 to -0.2) | ||||
Variety | 8 | 8 | -8 | -6 | -2 | -9 | -7 | -25 | 35 | <0.001a |
(7 to 8) | (6 to 9) | (-10 to 1) | (-8 to -2) | (-5 to 0) | (-11 to -7) | (-8 to -5) | ||||
Price | 0.03 | -0.03 | -0.01 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.02 | Higher score is more healthful | 0.002a | |
(0 to 0.05) | (-0.04 to -0.01) | (-0.04 to 0.01) | (0.01 to 0.05) | (-0.12 to 0.1) | (-0.06 to 0.08) | (-0.21 to 0.1) | ||||
Promotions | 0.5 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 0 | -1 | -1 | -5 | 7 | <0.001a |
(-1 to 1) | (-1 to 1) | (-3 to 0) | (-2 to -1) | (-0.4 to 0) | (-1 to 0) | (-1 to 0) | ||||
Shelf placement | 5 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 0 | -3 | -5 | -15 | 21 | <0.001a |
(4 to 7) | (5 to 9) | (4 to 9) | (4 to 7) | (-3 to 4) | (-6 to 3) | (-6 to 1) | ||||
Store placement | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 1 | -4 | -4 | -15 | 21 | <0.001a |
(4 to 5) | (4 to 5) | (3 to 5) | (3 to 4) | (-4 to 5) | (-6 to 2) | (-6 to 1) | ||||
Quality | 17 | 17 | 17 | 17 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 18 | <0.001b |
(17 to 17) | (16 to 18) | (15 to 18) | (15 to 17) | (0 to 10) | (0 to 13) | (0 to 8) | ||||
Healthier alternative | 4 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | <0.001b |
(4 to 5) | (5 to 5) | (2 to 3) | (2 to 3) | (0 to 1) | (1 to 2) | (0 to 2) | ||||
Nutrition information | 13 | 14 | 13 | 15 | 4 | 11 | 9 | 0 | 15 | <0.001b |
(10 to 13) | (12 to 15) | (13 to 14) | (15 to 15) | (2 to 7) | (9 to 13) | (9 to 12) | ||||
Single sale of two fruitse | 100% | 97% | 26% | 87% | 23% | 19% | 21% | 0 | 2 | <0.001c |