Skip to main content
. 2015 Mar 18;10(3):e0121758. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121758

Table 3. Probit regression models for contraceptive use in urban and rural areas (ref: non-users).

  Model 4 - Urban Model 4 - Rural 
 Level 1—Women        
Wealth index        
Linear -   -  
Difference 0.184 ** 0.188 *
Education (Ref: No formal education)        
Primary 0.338 ** 0.300 ***
Secondary or Higher 0.745 *** 0.686 ***
Religion (ref: Catholic)        
Evangelical/Pentecostal -0.134 0.031
Zionist -0.291 ** 0.057
Islamic -0.001 -0.101
Other -0.152 -0.349 **
Age (ref: 20–24)        
15–19 years -0.016 -0.214
25–29 years -0.117 -0.007
30–34 years -0.271 ** -0.171
35–39 years -0.490 *** -0.122
40–44 years -0.824 *** -0.390 **
45–49 years -1.248 *** -0.529 ***
Marital status (ref: Married)        
Other -0.053 -0.053
Currently residing with husband/partner (ref: yes)        
No -0.319 *** -0.106
Other wives (ref: No)        
Yes 0.046 0.029
Female occupation (ref: Not working)        
Working 0.102 0.043
Distance to medical help (ref: no big problem)        
A big problem -0.018 -0.029
Living children (reference: 1)        
0 -0.868 *** -0.916 ***
2 0.382 *** 0.139
3 0.525 *** 0.149
4+ 0.832 *** 0.448 ***
Thresholds 1.373 *** 1.772 ***
 Level 2—Communities         
Wealth index        
Wealth Index (PSU) 0.259 *** 0.475 ***
Residence (ref: Rural)        
Urban - -
Region (ref:Nampula)        
Niassa 0.061 0.564 **
Cabo Delgado -0.543 * -0.246
Nampula -0.434 -0.165
Tete -0.229 0.908 ***
Manica -0.077 0.268
Sofala -0.368 0.357 *
Inhambane -0.107 0.371 *
Gaza 0.466 * 0.491 **
Maputo 0.330 0.535 *
Var(u j ) 0.001   0.102 *** 
ICC 0.001   0.093  

Notes: Residual variance is equal to 1;

*** (p < 0.001),

** (p < 0.01),

* (p < 0.05).