Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Perceptions about Corner Stores and Patronage by Intervention Status and Time

From: Substantial improvements not seen in health behaviors following corner store conversions in two Latino food swamps

  Intervention Comparison Percent or Mean Difference (Follow-up – Baseline)
Percent or Mean (SD) Percent or Mean (SD)
  Baseline Follow-up Baseline Follow-up Intervention Comparison
  (N = 313) (N = 323) (N = 482) (N = 568)   
Corner Store Characteristics
Corner stores sell a wide variety of fresh fruits 8.9 26.3*** 18.5 26.6** 17.4 8.1
Corner stores sell a wide variety of fresh vegetables 10.9 35.6*** 19.5 29.6*** 24.7 10.1
Corner stores sell a wide variety of frozen or canned fruits 27.2 36.2* 31.1 42.3*** 9.0 11.2***
Corner stores sell a wide variety of frozen or canned vegetables 25.9 35.3* 30.5 41.7*** 9.4 11.2**
Fresh fruits sold at corner stores are not of poor qualitya 40.0 45.5 44.2 51.4* 5.5 7.2
The fresh vegetables sold at corner stores are of good quality 22.7 44.0*** 25.1 30.3 21.3 5.2
Corner stores sell healthy food 34.2 51.4*** 37.6 45.2* 17.2 7.6
Corner stores are not dirtyb 60.1 77.4*** 66.2 68.8 17.3 2.6
Corner stores are not dangerousc 70.0 83.9*** 75.5 75.2 13.9 −0.3
Corner stores have good customer service 73.5 85.4*** 70.5 75.0 11.9 4.5
I can get information about nutrition and healthy eating at corner stores 10.2 28.5*** 12.9 16.2 18.3 3.3
Corner stores sell traditional Latino food ingredients 77.0 83.6* 76.6 83.5** 6.6 6.9***
The staff at corner stores speaks my language 86.3 92.0* 82.8 90.7*** 5.7 7.9
Food sold at corner stores is not expensived 20.4 22.6 28.2 28.0 2.2 −0.2
It is convenient to shop at corner stores 47.6 50.5 49.4 52.3 2.9 2.9
Overall Beliefs About Corner Stores Score (Range: 0-15 6.1 (3.4) 8.0 (3.6)*** 6.7 (3.4) 7.6 (3.6)*** 1.9 1.0
Corner Store Patronage
Shops at 1 or more study stores 41.5 46.7 28.2 23.4 5.2 −4.8***
  1. NOTES: Significant differences in binary variables were tested between intervention baseline and follow-up using chi-squared tests, comparison baseline and follow-up using chi-squared tests, and percent difference (follow-up – baseline) for intervention and comparison using a Wald test on the interaction term of a logistic regression (more details can be seen in Additional file 2: Table S2). This Wald test can be thought of as testing whether the relative change (on an odds ratio scale) is the same in the intervention and comparison groups. Significant differences in continuous variables were tested between intervention baseline and follow-up using independent sample t-tests, comparison baseline and follow-up using independent sample t-tests tests, and mean difference (follow-up – baseline) for intervention and comparison using a F-test on the interaction term of a linear regression (more details can be seen in Additional file 3: Table S3)
  2. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
  3. aQuestion was reverse coded. Original statement was “Fresh fruits sold at corner stores are of poor quality”
  4. bQuestion was reverse coded. Original statement was “Corner stores are dirty”
  5. cQuestion was reverse coded. Original statement was “Corner stores are dangerous”
  6. dQuestion was reverse coded. Original statement was “Food sold at corner stores is expensive”