Skip to main content
. 2018 Feb 9;18:233. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5086-5

Table 2.

Proportions of participants’ (N = 308) with certain neighborhood characteristics (% land use) in different buffers surrounding their homes

400 m buffer 800 m buffer 1600 m buffer
Mean (± SD) Median (IQR) Mean (± SD) Median (IQR) Mean (± SD) Median (IQR)
Residences 64.8 (14.1) 67.8 (21.2) 52.5 (13.0) 54.8 (19.0) 38.2 (9.2) 37.9 (17.1)
Roads 5.1 (3.5) 4.4 (3.4) 5.5 (2.3) 5.6 (3.5) 5.5 (2.0) 5.7 (1.9)
Shops and foodservice industry 4.8 (7.0) 2.7 (6.2) 4.3 (6.5) 2.3 (3.1) 3.8 (6.5) 2.0 (3.5)
Public social-cultural facilities 4.0 (6.1) 1.9 (5.8) 4.2 (4.4) 2.8 (5.3) 4.6 (2.9) 4.1 (4.6)
Green space 9.8 (10.1) 7.2 (15.0) 13.8 (12.6) 10.3 (14.8) 20.1 (12.9) 17.5 (17.8)
Blue space 2.3 (4.8) 0.0 (2.4) 5.1 (7.8) 0.0 (8.2) 7.3 (8.8) 3.0 (14.2)
Sports terrain 2.4 (5.7) 0.0 (2.5) 3.6 (5.0) 2.3 (2.4) 4.3 (3.1) 3.0 (3.6)
Recreational area 0.9 (3.3) 0.0 (0.0) 1.2 (2.7) 0.0 (0.9) 1.1 (1.4) 0.4 (1.5)

Note: SD standard deviation, IQR interquartile range. Most land use variables were not normally distributed, hence the median is presented. As for some variables the median was 0, the mean was also presented for interpretation