Table 5

Sensitivity analysis of selected students known to live within 5 km buffer (Nā€‰=ā€‰9 271)
Quartiles Total natural space Green space Blue space
RR (95% CI)a RR (95% CI)a RR (95% CI)a
1 1.00 1.00 1.00
2 1.00 (0.94-1.06) 1.00 (0.93-1.06) 1.02 (0.96-1.08)
3 1.11 (1.05-1.17) 1.05 (0.99-1.11) 1.08 (1.01-1.14)
4 1.03 (0.96-1.09) 1.03 (0.96-1.09) 1.08 (1.02-1.14)
P trend 0.04 0.19 0.003
By urban/rural geographic location
Rural area
1 1.00 1.00 1.00
2 - - -
3 - - -
4 - - -
P trend - - -
Small city
1 1.00 1.00 1.00
2 0.98 (1.01-1.22) 1.08 (0.95-1.20) 1.10 (0.97-1.22)
3 1.12 (1.07-1.32) 1.14 (1.03-1.24) 1.15 (1.03-1.26)
4 1.11 (1.00-1.22) 1.06 (0.95-1.16) 1.19 (1.07-1.29)
P trend 0.05 0.35 0.001
Metropolitan area
1 1.00 1.00 1.00
2 0.97 (0.87-1.08) 0.98 (0.85-1.11) 1.03 (0.93-1.14)
3 1.11 (0.99-1.22) 1.03 (0.90-1.16) 1.14 (1.03-1.25)
4 1.10 (0.95-1.24) 1.12 (0.97-1.26) 1.15 (1.01-1.29)
P trend 0.06 0.07 0.004

RR (95% CI), Risk ratio (95% Confidence Intervals).

aAdjusted for gender, age, ethnicity, family affluence, perceived neighborhood safety, and neighborhood rundown houses as determined in Model 3 of Table 3.

Huynh et al.

Huynh et al. BMC Public Health 2013 13:407   doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-407

Open Data