Skip to main content
. 2006 Feb 27;6:49. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-49

Table 4.

Multivariate prevalence ratiosa (CI 95%) for condom use and participation in compensated sexb.

Variable Categories PR of condom use PR of compensated sex
Age 15 – 18 1.0 1.0
19 – 21 1.024 (0.818 – 1.228) 1.446 (0.607 – 2.149)
Years of sexual activity < 1 year 1.0 1.0
2 to 3 1.008 (0.812 – 1.184) 0.530 (0.141 – 0.932)***
4 or more 0.018 (0.837 – 1.152) 0.700 (0.291 – 1.241)
Sex Women 1.0 1.0
Men 1.744 (1.534 – 1.912)*** 0.928 (0.586 – 1.139)
Socioeconomic level Lowest 20% 1.0 1.0
Second lower 20% 1.101 (1.002 – 1.173)** 0.875 (0.487 – 1.058)
Remaining 60% 1.062 (0.969 – 1.106) 0.929 (0.480 – 1.025)
Adolescent attending to school No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.963 (0.741 – 1.099) 0.961 (0.672 – 1.046)
Education level standard for age No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.927 (0.762 – 1.025) 1.007 (0.737 – 1.072)
Educational gap of adolescents not attending school
and with education level not standard for age
No gap 1.0 1.0
Years of gap 1.011 (0.997 – 1.024) 0.994 (0.942 – 1.037)
Report labor activities No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.861 (0.586 – 1.153) 1.035 (0.700 – 1.262)
Attending school and report labor activities No 1.0
Yes 1.072 (1.009 – 1.093)**
Living with a partner No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.686 (0.511 – 0.864)*** 0.808 (0.317 – 1.354)
Count with a close friend No 1.0 1.0
Yes 1.197 (0.785 – 1.729) 0.377 (0.098 – 0.987)**
Drinks alcohol No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.923 (0.772 – 1.050) 0.875 (0.459 – 1.092)
Smokes No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.991 (0.838 – 1.097) 0.969 (0.618 – 1.073)
Reported STI symptoms No 1.0 1.0
Yes 0.982 (0.917 – 1.005) 0.999 (0.865 – 1.015)
Geographical area of residence Center 1.0 1.0
Golf 1.082 (0.950 – 1.177) 1.033 (0.642 – 1.224)
North 1.061 (0.908 – 1.157) 1.102 (0.512 – 1.319)
North Pacific 0.987 (0.929 – 1.015) 0.942 (0.620 – 0.995)***
Central Pacific 1.046 (0.961 – 1.099) 1.183 (0.897 – 1.290)
South Pacific 1.104 (1.012 – 1.161)** 0.970 (0.685 – 1.049)
Yucatan peninsula 1.003 (0.976 – 1.015) 1.022 (0.901 – 1.046)
Nc 2067 2347

a Estimated using the formulae PR = OR/ [(1-P0)+(P0*OR)] as suggested by Zhang & Yu [18]. b Confidence intervals were estimated reflecting design effect. c Number of observations is less than in descriptive because of missing values. ***P-value < 1%; **P-value < 5%; * P-value < 10%