Feeling safe: a critical look at the effect of neighborhood safety features and perceptions on childhood symptoms of depression

Table 2 Characteristics of the population (n = 474) at baseline and follow-up from pooled estimates across 50 multiple imputed datasets

Characteristics¹	Males (n = 262)	Females (n = 212)	p
Age in months, mean (SD)	115.05 (10.8)	115.37 (11.1)	0.16
Body mass index z-score (BMI z-score)	1.08 (1.3)	0.99 (1.3)	0.12
Parent(s) with university degree, %	54.2%	53.8%	0.93
Household income < $50,000, %	63.0%	64.6%	0.75
In puberty, %	8.8%	39.6%	< 0.0001
Meets guidelines for daily PA (≥ 60 min), %	13.4%	2.8%	< 0.0001
Symptoms of depression, mean (SD)
Baseline	3.49 (2.9)	3.77 (3.2)	0.22
Follow-up	3.54 (2.9)	3.67 (3.4)	0.19
Perception safety measures, mean (SD)
Child perceived safety	1.47 (0.5)	1.38 (0.5)	0.13
Parent perceived safety	3.24 (0.7)	3.23 (0.7)	0.16
Parent perceived community cohesion	2.13 (0.6)	2.13 (0.6)	0.16
Objective safety measures, %
At least one visible disorder/neighborhood safety issue feature	37.4%	30.7%	0.12
At least one road safety feature	68.7%	70.8%	0.63
High land-use mix (top and middle tertile), %	33.2%	34.0%	0.93
Population density per Km²	3740.6 (3032.4)	3249.3 (2603.9)	0.09

¹all values presented are at baseline unless otherwise specified; missing data that were imputed include: symptoms of depression at baseline (n = 2), symptoms of depression at follow-up (n = 52), Tanner stage (n = 1), household income (n = 4), highest parental education (n = 3), physical activity (n = 82); age, BMI z-score, sex, subjective neighborhood measures and objective neighborhood measures had no missing data

ISSN: 1471-2431