. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Oct 1.

Published in final edited form as: Am J Prev Med. 2016 May 18;51(4):419–426. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.03.021

Table 4.

Negative Binomial Regression Models Predicting Total Park Use and MVPA Time in Parks^a

Factors	Total park use (person-hours)
	Model 1		Model 2

	β (SE)	exp (β)	β (SE)	exp (β)
Park size in acres	0.09 (0.01)^***	1.09	0.01 (0.01)	1.01
Population density (per 10,000 in 1-mile radius)	0.12 (0.02)^***	1.13	0.06 (0.03)^*	1.07
% Households in poverty	−0.01 (0.01)^*	0.99	−0.01 (0.01)	0.99
Litters in parks			0.25 (0.12)^*	1.29
Homeless people in parks			0.20 (0.16)	1.22
Vendors in parks			0.57 (0.12)^***	1.77
Dogs unleashed in parks			0.09 (0.13)	1.09
Graffiti in parks			−0.08 (0.24)	0.92
# accessible target areas			0.02 (0.01)^**	1.02
# target areas with supervised activities			0.39 (0.03)^***	1.48
Onsite marketing (banners, signage, posters)			0.48 (0.16)^**	1.62

Factors	MVPA time in parks (person-hours of MVPA)
	Model 1		Model 2

	β (SE)	exp (β)	β (SE)	exp (β)
Park size in acres	0.08 (0.01)^***	1.08	0.00 (0.01)	1.00
Population density (1-mile radius)	0.11 (0.02)^***	1.11	0.05 (0.02)^*	1.05
% Households in poverty	−0.01 (0.01)	0.99	−0.01 (0.01)	0.99
Litters in parks			0.15 (0.12)	1.16
Homeless people in parks			0.08 (0.15)	1.08
Vendors in parks			0.52 (0.11)^***	1.68
Dogs unleashed in parks			0.12 (0.13)	1.13
Graffiti in parks			0.12 (0.24)	1.12
# accessible target areas			0.02 (0.01)^**	1.02
# target areas with supervised activities			0.31 (0.03)^***	1.37
Onsite marketing (banners, signage, posters)			0.49 (0.14)^***	1.63

Note: Boldface indicates statistical significance

^***

p<0.001

^**

p<0.01

p<0.05.

Other variables controlled in the models included indicators for cities, days of a week, and hours in a day. Within-park correlations were adjusted by generalized estimation equation.

MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity