Table 2:

A summary of three statistical models (relative risk, RR and 95% pointwise CIs, lower and upper) that explain possible associations between tobacco retailer counts in each subregion using different sets of factors.

	Model 1 Sociodemographic			Model 2: HOLC grade			Model 3: Sociodemographic + HOLC grade
Factor	RR	Lower	Upper	RR	Lower	Upper	RR	Lower	Upper
Akron vs Columbus	1.04	0.87	1.25	0.95	0.78	1.16	1.05	0.88	1.25
Canton vs Columbus	1.17	0.93	1.48	1.08	0.84	1.39	1.17	0.94	1.45
Cleveland vs Columbus	1.10	0.96	1.27	1.08	0.92	1.25	1.09	0.96	1.25
Dayton vs Columbus	1.08	0.89	1.30	1.08	0.88	1.33	1.08	0.90	1.29
Hamilton vs Columbus	1.17	0.91	1.50	1.08	0.82	1.41	1.15	0.91	1.46
Lima vs Columbus	1.29	0.92	1.81	1.18	0.82	1.70	1.27	0.93	1.75
Lorain vs Columbus	1.22	0.93	1.59	1.20	0.90	1.60	1.20	0.93	1.54
Portsmouth vs Columbus	1.18	0.76	1.83	1.33	0.83	2.11	1.16	0.77	1.75
Springfield vs Columbus	1.21	0.88	1.67	1.18	0.83	1.66	1.20	0.89	1.63
Toledo vs Columbus	1.10	0.91	1.32	1.14	0.93	1.39	1.11	0.93	1.32
Warren vs Columbus	1.41	1.07	1.86	1.45	1.07	1.96	1.40	1.08	1.82
Youngstown vs Columbus	1.04	0.81	1.34	1.00	0.76	1.32	1.02	0.81	1.30
African American	1.12	1.02	1.24				1.12	1.02	1.22
Hispanic	1.25	1.08	1.44				1.21	1.06	1.39
Poverty	1.65	1.50	1.80				1.60	1.47	1.75
Aged Below 18	0.83	0.77	0.90				0.83	0.77	0.89
HOLC grade B vs A				1.68	1.31	2.15	1.37	1.07	1.75
HOLC grade C vs A				2.35	1.83	3.01	1.81	1.42	2.31
HOLC grade D vs A				2.79	2.11	3.68	1.98	1.52	2.60
HOLC grade E vs A				1.80	1.41	2.29	1.68	1.33	2.13

The CIs account for possible spatial dependence among the subregions. Values in bold indicate relative risks that are significantly different from one.

Model 1 includes terms for City, African American, Hispanic, Poverty and Age Below 18; Model 2 includes City and HOLC grade; and Model 3 includes City, African American, Hispanic, Poverty, Age Below 18, and HOLC grade.