Table 4.
Multinomial subgroup analysis
| # | Characteristics | Medium utilization (n = 1857) vs highest utilization (n = 5682) subgroup | Lowest utilization (n = 1768) vs highest utilization (n = 5682) subgroup | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | p-value | OR (95% CI) | p-value | ||
| 1 | Child gender | ||||
| Female | Ref | Ref | |||
| Male | 1.06 (0.85–1.33) | 0.558 | 1.12 (0.88–1.41) | 0.336 | |
| 2 | Mother’s current age | 0.96 (0.94–0.98) | <0.001*** | 0.92 (0.90–0.95) | <0.001*** |
| 3 | Mother’s marital status | ||||
| Never in union | Ref | Ref | |||
| Married/living with partner | 1.36 (0.74–2.49) | 0.333 | 1.64 (1.00–2.67) | 0.067 | |
| Widowed/divorced/separated | 1.06 (0.54–2.07) | 0.869 | 2.02 (1.07–3.83) | 0.018* | |
| 4 | Maternal parity | 1.18 (1.10–1.27) | <0.001*** | 1.30 (1.21–1.41) | <0.001*** |
| 5 | Mother’s employment status | ||||
| No | Ref | Ref | |||
| Yes | 1.08 (0.84–1.39) | 0.465 | 0.60 (0.47–0.78) | <0.001*** | |
| 6 | Mother’s education level | ||||
| No education | Ref | Ref | |||
| Primary | 0.69 (0.54–0.87) | 0.002** | 0.31 (0.24–0.41) | <0.001*** | |
| Secondary | 0.42 (0.30–0.59) | <0.001*** | 0.09 (0.06–0.14) | <0.001*** | |
| Higher | 0.19 (0.06–0.61) | 0.002** | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | <0.001*** | |
| 7 | Wealth quintile | ||||
| Lowest | Ref | Ref | |||
| Low | 0.79 (0.58–1.07) | 0.075 | 0.79 (0.56–1.10) | 0.136 | |
| Middle | 0.74 (0.56–1.10) | 0.042* | 0.51 (0.37–0.70) | <0.001*** | |
| High | 0.49 (0.34–0.69) | <0.001*** | 0.48 (0.32–0.72) | 0.002** | |
| Highest | 0.52 (0.30–0.88) | 0.013* | 0.23 (0.12–0.43) | <0.001*** | |
| 8 | Place of residence | ||||
| Rural | Ref | Ref | |||
| Urban | 0.68 (0.51–0.92) | 0.009** | 0.37 (0.27–0.51) | <0.001*** | |
Multinomial logistic regression models were fitted. All p-values are based on two-sided Wald tests.
Ref reference group for the given variable, OR odds ratio, 95% CI 95% confidence interval.
*p-value < 0.05, **p-value < 0.01, ***p-value < 0.001.