Table 3.
Multilevel parameter estimates and odds of modern contraceptive use among sexually active women aged (15–49), SADHS 2016
| Variables | Model 0 | Model I | Model II | Model III |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| aOR (95%CI) | aOR (95%CI) | aOR (95%CI) | ||
| Individual factors | ||||
| Age | ||||
| 15–24 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 25–34 | 0.63*** [0.52, 0.76] | 0.63*** [0.52, 0.77] | ||
| 35–49 | 0.29*** [0.23, 0.37] | 0.29*** [0.23, 0.38] | ||
| Education level | ||||
| None | 1 | 1 | ||
| Primary | 1.16 [0.71, 1.90] | 1.15 [0.70, 1.89] | ||
| Secondary | 1.42 [0.93, 2.17] | 1.43 [0.94, 2.18] | ||
| Higher | 1.94** [1.20, 3.11] | 1.96* [1.22, 3.15] | ||
| Marital Status | ||||
| Never Married | 1 | 1 | ||
| Married | 0.84 [0.62, 1.13] | 0.83 [0.61, 1.12] | ||
| Formally married | 0.68* [0.50, 0.92] | 0.67* [0.49, 0.90] | ||
| Wealth Status | ||||
| Poor | 1 | 1 | ||
| Middle | 1.01 [0.84, 1.21] | 1.00 [0.82, 1.21] | ||
| Rich | 0.94 [0.79, 1.12] | 0.92 [0.73, 1.16] | ||
| Employment status | ||||
| Not working | 1 | 1 | ||
| Working | 1.05 [0.90, 1.21] | 0.99 [0.85, 1.16] | ||
| Living children | ||||
| Zero | 1 | 1 | ||
| One | 1.80*** [1.43, 2.25] | 1.79*** [1.43, 2.25] | ||
| Two – Three | 3.26*** [2.55, 4.16] | 3.26*** [2.55, 4.17] | ||
| Four or more | 3.90*** [2.84, 5.36] | 3.96*** [2.87, 5.45] | ||
| Visited health facility in the last 12 months | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 1.81*** [1.58, 2.08] | 1.81*** [ 1.58, 2.08] | ||
| Woman decision-making autonomy | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 1.32 [0.98, 1.79] | 1.32 [0.97, 1.79] | ||
| Ideal number of children | ||||
| Zero | 1 | 1 | ||
| One – Two | 1.25 [0.95, 1.63] | 1.25 [0.96, 1.63] | ||
| Three – Four | 0.98 [0.75, 1.29] | 1.02 [0.78, 1.34] | ||
| Five or more | 0.62* [0.43, 0.90] | 0.67* [0.47, 0.97] | ||
| Sensory disability status | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 0.82* [0.68, 0.99] | 0.81* [0.67, 0.98] | ||
| Ownership of mobile phone | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 1.44** [1.14, 1.81] | 1.45** [1.15, 1.82] | ||
| Exposure to FP messages | ||||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 0.36 [0.21, 0.64] | 1.02 [ 0.87, 1.19] | ||
| Community-level variables | ||||
| Residence | ||||
| Urban | 1 | 1 | ||
| Rural | 1.01 [0.86, 1.19] | 0.97 [ 0.81, 1.16] | ||
| Community education | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 1.16 [0.95, 1.42] | 1.09 [0.84, 1.42] | ||
| High | 0.88 [0.77, 1.01] | 0.90 [0.77, 1.07] | ||
| Community wealth status | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 0.85 [0.70, 1.03] | 0.90 [0.71, 1.12] | ||
| High | 0.78* [0.64, 0.95] | 0.87 [0.67, 1.13] | ||
| Community employment | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 1.18* [1.03, 1.36] | 1.12 [0.95, 1.32] | ||
| High | 1.35*** [1.14, 1.59] | 1.32* [1.06, 1.64] | ||
| Community access to FP messages | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 0.98 [0.84, 1.14] | 1.01 [0.84, 1.21] | ||
| High | 1.06 [ 0.90, 1.25] | 1.06 [0.86, 1.30] | ||
| Community ideal number of children | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 0.95 [0.81, 1.10] | 0.95 [0.79, 1.13] | ||
| High | 0.77** [0.65, 0.90] | 0.75** [0.63, 0.90] | ||
| Community woman decision-making autonomy | ||||
| Low | 1 | 1 | ||
| Moderate | 0.97 [0.84, 1.13] | 1.00 [0.84, 1.18] | ||
| High | 1.06 [0.91, 1.22] | 1.03 [0.85, 1.25] | ||
| Random effects | ||||
| PSU Variance (95% CI) | 0.26 [0.18–0.36] | 0.25 [0.17–0.37] | 0.17 [0.12–0.26] | 0.23 [0.16–0.34] |
| ICC (%) | 7.3 | 7.1 | 5.0 | 6.6 |
| PVC (%) | Ref | 3.8 | 34.6 | 11.5 |
| MOR | 1.62 | 1.61 | 1.49 | 1.58 |
| Wald chi-square | Ref | 328.85*** | 38.57*** | 375.48*** |
| Model fitness | ||||
| Log-likelihood | -4739.4 | -4445.8 | -4773.8 | -4434.7 |
| AIC | 9482.7 | 8937.7 | 9577.7 | 8941.5 |
| BIC | 9496.5 | 9095.4 | 9680.6 | 9188.4 |
| N | 7,040 | 7,040 | 7,040 | 7,040 |
“*** p < 0.001; ** = p < 0.01; * = p < 0.05; 1 = Reference Category; Model 0 contains no explanatory variables; Model I includes individual-level factors only; Model II includes community-level factors only; Model III includes both individual-level and community-level factors aOR adjusted odds ratio, CI confidence internal, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient, PVC Proportional variance change, AIC Akaike information criterion, BIC Bayesian Information Criterion”