| |
Model 1*
|
Model 2
†
|
Model 3
§
|
|---|
| |
Unadjusted
|
Adjusted
|
Unadjusted
|
Adjusted
|
Unadjusted
|
Adjusted
|
|---|
| |
RR (95% CL)
|
RR (95% CL)
|
RR (95% CL)
|
RR (95% CL)
|
RR (95% CL)
|
RR (95% CL)
|
|---|
|
Variables
| | | | | | |
|
Cameras installed
|
0.22 (0.10, 0.52)
|
0.11 (0.06, 0.24)
|
0.31 (0.14, 0.72)
|
0.32 (0.15, 0.67)
|
—
|
—
|
|
Partitions installed
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
1.11 (0.59, 2.09)
|
0.78 (0.41, 1.47)
|
|
Year¶
|
—
|
1.09 (1.00, 1.19)
|
—
|
0.98 (0.92, 1.04)
|
—
|
0.88 (0.83, 0.94)
|
|
City homicide rate**
|
—
|
1.10 (1.01, 1.20)
|
—
|
1.12 (1.03, 1.23)
|
—
|
1.12 (1.06, 1.19)
|
- *Rate ratio of taxicab driver homicide rates post-installation versus pre-installation of cameras.
- †Rate ratio of taxicab driver homicide rates in camera cities compared to control cities.
- §Rate ratio of taxicab driver homicide rates in partition cities compared to control cities.
- ¶The rate ratio represents an associated change in taxicab driver homicide rate for every increase of 1 year.
- **The rate ratio represents an associated increase in taxicab driver homicide rate for every 1 unit increase in city homicide rate.
