Table 4.
Adjusted ORs and 95 % CIs showing influence of change in fertility desires on change in modern contraceptive use
| Covariate | ETHIOPIA (UNADJ) | ETHIOPIA (ADJ)d | GHANA (UNADJ) | GHANA (ADJ)d | NIGERIA (UNADJ) | NIGERIA (ADJ)d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fertility desire at baseline (Ref = Want more) | 1.40 (1.06, 1.85)a | 2.03 (1.44, 2.85)c | 1.18 (0.76, 1.84) | 1.30 (0.77, 2.19) | 1.71 (1.23, 2.38)c | 1.60 (1.06, 2.41)a |
| Time (Ref = Baseline) | 0.68 (0.54, 0.86)c | 0.66 (0.51, 0.85)c | 0.49 (0.28, 0.84)a | 0.49 (0.28, 0.84)a | 1.28 (0.92, 1.79) | 1.21 (0.86, 1.72) |
| Baseline fertility desire X Time | 1.32 (0.92, 1.90) | 1.32 (0.89, 1.97) | 2.71 (1.31, 5.62)a | 2.59 (1.24, 5.41)a | 1.13 (0.70, 1.85) | 1.28 (0.77, 2.13) |
| Time + Baseline fertility desire X Time | 0.90 (0.69, 1.18) | 0.87 (0.64, 1.17) | 1.32 (0.85, 2.05) | 1.26 (0.80, 1.97) | 1.45 (1.02, 2.07)a | 1.55 (1.07, 2.26)a |
| Constant | 1.77 (1.50, 2.09)c | 0.82 (0.48, 1.39) | 0.14 (0.10, 0.18)c | 0.07 (0.03, 0.17)c | 0.35 (0.28, 0.43)c | 0.07 (0.03, 0.19)c |
a p < 0.05; b p < 0.01; c p < 0.001
dModels were adjusted for age, parity, educational level, wealth and polygyny
Ethiopia: Sebeta; Ghana: Asawase; Nigeria: Ipetomodu
(For these generalized linear models with an underlying binomial distribution, an exchangeable correlation structure was assumed and robust variances estimated, using maximum likelihood estimation.)
X: multiplication