Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 20;3:100052. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2021.100052

Table 2.

SEM model comparing shooting rates in HOLC Red vs Green areas in Boston in the A) direct pathway between HOLC Red (vs Green) designation and shooting rate accounting for mediators B) direct pathway between HOLC Red (vs Green) designation and the mediators (Mx), C) direct pathway between the mediators and shooting rate and D) Indirect pathway from HOLC Red (vs Green) designation to shooting rate through the mediators (Mx) of interest.

  • A)

    Direct

HOLC Red→ Firearm Incident Rate(IRR, 95% CI)
HOLC Designation:
Red (vs Green)		 3•25*
(1•35, 7•85)
  • A)

    Direct

HOLC Red→Mx(Coefficient, 95% CI)
  • A)

    Direct

Mx→ Firearm Incident Rate(IRR, 95% CI)
  • A)

    Indirect

HOLC Red→ Firearm Incident Rate(IRR, 95% CI)		 Percent mediated (%)
M1 (poverty, poor educational attainment, and need for public services) 0•59 (0•52, 0•66)
p<0.001		 1•86 (1•28, 2•69)
p<0.001		 1•39 (1•14, 1•70)
p<0.001		 20
M2 (housing affordability and income inequality) -0•35 (-0•44, -0•26)
p<0.001		 1•11 (0•95, 1•28)
p=0.13		 0•96 (0•91, 1•02)
p=0.14
M3 (Share of rented housing) 0•38 (0•32, 0•45)
p<0.001		 1•45 (1•01, 2•08)
p=0.01		 1•19 (1•04, 1•36)
p=0.01		 8
M4 (Black share of the population) 0•12 (0•07, 0•17)
p<0.001		 1•46 (1•20, 1•79)
p<0.001		 1•05 (1•01, 1•08)
p=0.01		 3

Green= “Best”, Blue= “Still Desirable,” Yellow= “Definitely Declining,” Red= “Hazardous”