Table A.8.

Sensitivity analyses: Association between deprivation and online unique cuisine type access amongst postcode districts in England. Estimated using uncontrolled and controlled negative binomial regression and nine categories of food outlets from Ordnance Survey Points of Interest data ^a.

	Model 0b			Model 1b
Unique cuisine types accessible (count)	IRRc	95% CI		IRRc	95% CI
IMD score (deciles)
1 (4.28–10.21); least deprived	ref	–	–	ref	–	–
2 (10.22–12.08)	0.96	0.80	1.14	0.90	0.82	0.99
3 (12.09–14.00)	1.05	0.88	1.25	0.86	0.78	0.95
4 (14.01–15.91)	1.18	1.00	1.41	0.81	0.73	0.89
5 (15.92–18.18)	1.12	0.94	1.33	0.77	0.69	0.84
6 (18.19–20.60)	1.21	1.02	1.44	0.75	0.68	0.83
7 (20.61–23.54)	1.39	1.17	1.66	0.67	0.61	0.75
8 (23.55–27.06)	1.62	1.37	1.93	0.73	0.66	0.81
9 (27.07–32.89)	1.87	1.58	2.23	0.80	0.73	0.89
10 (32.90–69.51); most deprived	2.08	1.75	2.48	0.83	0.75	0.92

^a Food outlet categories included: Fast food and takeaway outlets, Fast food delivery services, Fish and Chip shops, Restaurants, Cafes, snack bars and tea rooms, Convenience stores, Supermarkets, Bakeries, Delicatessens.

^b Model 0 = uncontrolled. 2118 postcode districts included. Model 1 = controlled for postcode district rural urban classification, population density, the number of food outlets within their boundary and the number of food outlets accessible online. 2088 postcode districts included.

^c Incidence Rate Ratios (IRR) represent expected difference of outcome at each level of deprivation, compared to the reference group.