Skip to main content

Table 2 Global spatial autocorrelation of risk factors and their correlation with malaria incidence

From: Geo-visual integration of health outcomes and risk factors using excess risk and conditioned choropleth maps: a case study of malaria incidence and sociodemographic determinants in Ghana

Risk factors

Global spatial autocorrelation

#Pearson's correlation with outcome rate

Bivariate spatial correlation with outcome rate

Univariate Moran's I

Pseudo p-value

z-value

Pearson's r

p-value

Bivariate Moran's I

Pseudo p-value

z-value

Basic education

0.138***

0.019

3.193

-0.226*

0.003

-0.062***

0.042

-1.493

Illiteracy

0.013

0.056

1.650

-0.103

0.180

-0.0004

0.465

-0.069

Religion

 Christian

-0.009

0.275

-0.072

-0.057

0.457

-0.019

0.329

-0.491

 Muslim

0.277***

0.002

5.186

-0.137

0.075

-0.039

0.140

-0.971

 Traditional

0.657***

0.001

10.855

0.014

0.856

0.019

0.324

0.414

 None/Other

0.176***

0.010

3.671

-0.194*

0.011

-0.064***

0.046

-1.505

Urban lev.

0.117***

0.022

2.860

-0.174*

0.023

-0.053

0.070

-1.287

Insanitary lev.

0.018

0.080

0.881

-0.002

0.983

0.008

0.374

0.226

Intermigration

-0.001

0.125

0.828

0.184*

0.016

0.089***

0.038

1.969

Intramigration

0.102***

0.034

2.100

0.144

0.060

0.111***

0.020

2.402

Traditional housing unit

0.030

0.129

0.849

-0.122

0.112

-0.021

0.314

-0.523

Household overcrowding index

0.076***

0.031

2.112

-0.148

0.054

-0.034

0.190

-0.836

Pop. density

0.018

0.080

0.881

-0.002

0.984

0.008

0.374

0.227

Dependency ratio

0.550***

0.001

9.051

-0.020

0.795

0.070

0.050

1.627

Employment to-population ratio

0.185***

0.012

4.777

-0.189*

0.014

-0.061***

0.042

-1.503

Agric household

0.122***

0.021

2.8055

0.178*

0.020

0.115***

0.015

2.536

  1. * significance level at p< 0.05 (2-tailed); ** significance level at p< 0.01 (2-tailed)
  2. ***spatial significance level at pseudo p < 0.05 for conditional 999 permutations.
  3. # Spatial correlation is most appropriate but the spatial correlation was much smaller than the non-spatial correlation and the departure from independence is consistent but weak. The assumption of spatial independence may have affected the non-spatial correlation result.