Skip to main content

Table 5 Individual variable and composite scores by neighbourhood deprivation

From: Measuring the healthfulness of food retail stores: variations by store type and neighbourhood deprivation

Variable Most deprived 2 3 4 Least deprived Possible range e  
   Median (IQR) c Min Max p-value
Composite score 0 -0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 -1.9 2.2 0.09a
(-0.9 to 0.8) (-0.9 to 0.8) (-0.9 to 0.8) (-0.7 to 0.8) (-0.8 to 0.9)
Variety -7 -7 -7 -7 -7 -25 35 0.6a
(-9 to -2.5) (-10 to -2) (-9 to -2) (-8 to -4) (-10 to -3)
Price 0.02 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 Higher score is more healthful 0.5a
(-0.04 to 0.06) (-0.05 to 0.08) (-0.04 to 0.06) (-0.01 to 0.06) (-0.01 to 0.06)
Promotions 0 -1 -1 -1 -1 -5 7 <0.001a
(-1 to 0) (-1 to 0) (-1 to 0) (-2 to 0) (-2 to 0)
Shelf placement 2 0 3 3 4 -15 21 0.04a
(-5 to 7) (-5 to 5) (-4 to 6) (-3 to 6) (-3 to 6)
Store placement 1 0 2 2 2 -15 21 0.05a
(-5 to 4) (-5 to 4) (-4 to 4) (-4 to 4) (-4 to 4)
Quality 9 8 13 12 14 0 18 0.002a
(1 to 15) (0 to 15) (3 to 17) (0 to 17) (3 to 17)
Healthier alternative 1 2 2 2 2 0 5 0.03a
(1 to 2) (1 to 3) (1 to 3) (1 to 3) (1 to 3)
Nutrition information 12 12 12 12 13 0 15 0.003a
(9 to 14) (9 to 14) (9 to 14) (10 to 15) (11 to 15)
Single sale of two fruitsd 42% 36% 39% 43% 43% 0 2 0.4b
  1. aSpearman test for trend, bChi square test, cMedian and inter-quartile range (IQR) were provided for both parametric and non-parametric variables for ease of reading, dPercentage of two fruits available for single sale was provided because this variable was categorical, ePossible range of scores for each variable except composite score which shows actual range of composite score values.