Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Sep 21.
Published in final edited form as: Public Health Nutr. 2010 Dec 21;14(6):960–964. doi: 10.1017/S1368980010003411

Table 3.

Comparisons of scores on each of the five domains between food stores, stratified by income status of nearby school and store acceptance of WIC vouchers

Domain name (possible range in score) Fresh fruit and vegetables (0–3) Processed fruit and vegetables (0–3) Healthy beverages (0–5) Healthy snacks (0–8) Healthy household items (0–9)
All stores
 Low income (n 29) 1·1 1·4 2·7 3·1 2·9
 Higher income (n 16) 1·1 1·1 3·8 4·5 3·9
P value 0·82 0·38 0·01 0·03 0·16
All stores
 Non-WIC (n 27) 0·7 1·0 2·8 3·1 2·6
 WIC (18) 1·8 1·7 3·6 4·3 4·3
P value <0·01 <0·01 0·07 <0·05 <0·01
Low income
 Non-WIC (n 14) 0·4 1·1 1·9 2·4 1·6
 WIC (n 15) 1·8 1·7 3·5 3·7 4·1
P value <0·01 0·07 <0·01 0·05 <0·01
High income
 Non-WIC (n 13) 0·9 0·9 3·8 3·8 3·5
 WIC (n 3) 1·7 2·0 4·0 7·3 5·3
P value 0·34 0·08 0·80 <0·01 0·24

WIC, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.

Bold typeface denotes P values ≤0·05, indicating that the difference between means is statistically significant.