Table 7.
Guadeloupe | La Réunion | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
% very effective method prescription |
adjusted OR |
95% CI | p* | % very effective method prescription |
adjusted OR |
95% CI | p* | |
Health insurance | ||||||||
No insurance or government medical aid | 64.7 | 1 | 0.007 | 81.3 | 1 | 0.07 | ||
Social security with or without additional private insurance | 77.5 | 1.7 | 1.2–2.5 | 86.8 | 1.6 | 1.0–2.7 | ||
Health care setting | ||||||||
Public hospital | 74.3 | 91.8 | 1 | <0.0001 | ||||
Private hospital | 80.1 | 70.4 | 0.2 | 0.1–0.4 | ||||
Physician’s private practice | 72.6 | 83.6 | 0.6 | 0.4–1.1 |
Source: DREES – enquête IVG – 2007 (Data from the French Ministry of Health; the source does not refer to a publication.)
The Table only includes variables that remained significant in the multivariate analysis. Variables for which p-values were less than 0.25 in the univariate model were included in the multivariate models (country of origin, income, health insurance, abortion technique and health care setting). We also introduced ‘age’ as a control variable, although the p-value was greater than 0.25 in the univariate analysis for La Réunion. Variables for which p-values were 0.25 or more (living in a couple, number of children ever born, previous abortion, level of education, professional situation) were not included in the multivariate models.