Table 2. Relative and absolute inequalities in under-five and neonatal mortality (per 1,000 live births) by rural-urban location and island divisions for selected years, with 95% confidence intervals and p-values for trend.
| Equity Marker | Under-five Mortality | Neonatal Mortality | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR | 95% CI | RD | 95% CI | RR | 95% CI | RD | 95% CI | |
| Urban/Rural (base = Urban) | ||||||||
| Rural | ||||||||
| 1980–81 | 1.36 | (1.13, 1.64) | 23.3 | (9.11, 37.32) | 1.08 | (0.78, 1.53) | 1.7 | (-5.91, 9.81) |
| 1990–91 | 1.42 | (1.2, 1.65) | 17.9 | (9.85, 25.94) | 1.21 | (0.91, 1.66) | 3.0 | (-1.65, 7.97) |
| 2000–01 | 1.35 | (1.07, 1.66) | 12.1 | (2.75, 20.26) | 1.25 | (0.89, 1.82) | 4.3 | (-2.08, 11.06) |
| 2010–11 | 1.01 | (0.63, 1.53) | 0.2 | (-13.94, 12.28) | 1.23 | (0.56, 2.75) | 2.4 | (-7.08, 10.29) |
| 2012–13 | 1.46 | (0.95, 2.56) | 10.6 | (-1.63, 26.36) | 2.71 | (1.27, 9.81) | 8.2 | (2.09, 16.28) |
| Trend 1 [p-value] | 0.998 | [0.796] | -1.210 | [<0.000] | 1.028 | [0.007] | 0.146 | [0.210] |
| Trend 2 [p-value] | 0.998 | [0.809] | -1.267 | [<0.000] | 1.017 | [0.054] | 0.108 | [0.468] |
| Island Division (base = Luzon) | ||||||||
| Visayas | ||||||||
| 1980–81 | 1.16 | (0.86, 1.71) | 11.2 | (-10.9, 44.2) | 1.15 | (0.62, 1.96) | 3.7 | (-11.23, 20.02) |
| 1990–91 | 1.38 | (1.06, 1.71) | 17.0 | (3.2, 29.6) | 1.44 | (0.96, 2.15) | 6.6 | (-0.68, 14.86) |
| 2000–01 | 1.17 | (0.85, 1.59) | 5.8 | (-5.9, 18.7) | 1.42 | (0.88, 2.2) | 7.2 | (-2.19, 17.38) |
| 2010–11 | 0.68 | (0.42, 1.69) | -8.4 | (-18.2, 16.8) | 0.83 | (0.15, 2.17) | -1.9 | (-11.33, 9.12) |
| 2012–13 | 1.23 | (0.59, 2.23) | 5.1 | (-12.4, 23.2) | 0.74 | (0, 1.95) | -2.4 | (-12.04, 7.15) |
| Trend 1 [p-value] | 0.997 | [0.801] | -0.676 | [0.103] | 0.994 | [0.726] | -0.096 | [0.722] |
| Trend 2 [p-value] | 0.996 | [0.838] | -0.672 | [0.200] | 1.005 | [0.756] | 0.045 | [0.881] |
| Mindanao | ||||||||
| 1980–81 | 1.55 | (1.2, 2.16) | 38.3 | (15.7, 70.9) | 0.92 | (0.51, 1.55) | -2.1 | (-14.72, 11.09) |
| 1990–91 | 1.57 | (1.26, 1.95) | 25.2 | (13.1, 38.4) | 1.10 | (0.73, 1.65) | 1.6 | (-4.78, 8.51) |
| 2000–01 | 1.56 | (1.24, 2.01) | 19.6 | (9, 31.9) | 1.19 | (0.82, 1.72) | 3.3 | (-3.41, 10.6) |
| 2010–11 | 1.48 | (0.87, 2.3) | 12.6 | (-4.1, 28.7) | 1.43 | (0.6, 2.98) | 4.7 | (-5.4, 16.25) |
| 2012–13 | 1.84 | (1.06, 2.97) | 18.8 | (1.8, 36.5) | 1.12 | (0.35, 2.6) | 1.1 | (-8.53, 10.09) |
| Trend 1 [p-value] | 1.010 | [0.044] | -1.018 | [0.000] | 1.006 | [0.457] | 0.009 | [0.955] |
| Trend 2 [p-value] | 1.008 | [0.176] | -1.149 | [0.000] | 1.008 | [0.421] | 0.041 | [0.830] |
Notes: See S1 File for full results. CI, confidence interval; RR, rate ratio; RD, rate difference. The small number of observations and possible non-linear relationships implies that the trend estimates should be treated with caution.
1. Trend regressions with all observations included.
2. Trend regressions with last 1 period (i.e. 2012–13) excluded from the sample.