Table 3.

Multivariate regression of association between baseline family planning use and baseline fertility intentions on pregnancy/birth experience between baseline and midterm among women not sterilized, infecund or pregnant at baseline, Uttar Pradesh, India (n=3808 - weighted)

Characteristic	Model 1 Odds Ratio (95% CI)	Model 2 Odds Ratio (95% CI)
City
Agra	1·23 (0·85–1·78)	1·22 (0·84–1·76)
Aligarh	1·15 (0·77–1·72)	1·13 (0·76–1·69)
Allahabad	0·71 (0·42–1·20)	0·70 (0·42–1·19)
Gorakhpur (ref)	1·00	1·00
Age Group
15–24	20·80 (11·95–36·21)***	21·62 (12·02–38·89)***
25–29	10·62 (6·17–18·28)***	10·93 (6·19–19·28)***
30–34	4·76 (2·61–8·65)***	4·82 (2·58–9·01)***
35+ (ref)	1·00	1·00
Education
None	1·39 (0·87–2·23)	1·37 (0·86–2·20)
1–11 years	0·87 (0·64–1·19)	0·90 (0·66–1·23)
12+ years (ref)	1·00	1·00
Religion
Hindu/other (ref)	1·00	1·00
Muslim	1·41 (0·97–2·05)+	1·41 (0·97–2·05)+
Wealth group
Poorest	0·89 (0·57–1·40)	0·90 (0·57–1·42)
Poor	0·94 (0·58–1·52)	0·92 (0·57–1·47)
Medium	1·22 (0·75–2·00)	1·21 (0·74–1·98)
Rich	0·94 (0·60–1·47)	0·93 (0·59-·1·46)
Richest (ref)	1·00	1·00
Residence
Slum	1·34 (1·05–1·71)*	1·36 (1·06–1·74)*
Non-slum	1·00	1·00
Baseline fertility intentions
Wants now/wants DK when/DK (ref)	1·00	1·00
Wants in 2+ years	1·37 (0·94–2·01)	1·27 (0·73–2·21)
Does not want	0·39 (0·28–0·56)***	0·65 (0·43–0·99)*
Family planning use at baseline
No (ref)	1·00	1·00
Yes	0·48 (0·36–0·65)***	1·02 (0·53–1·94)
Interaction between baseline fertility intentions and baseline FP use
Using FP and wants to delay	NA	0·66 (0·28–1·54)
Using FP and does not want any more		0·29 (0·13–0·61)***

Notes: DK: Don’t know; NA – not applicable;

⁺p≤0·10;

^*p≤0·05;

^**p ≤ 0·01;

^***p ≤ 0·001