Table 4.
Binary logistic regression model predicting the households’ likelihood to experience food insecurity and undesirable diet diversity in Bududa and Kiryandongo districts (Numbers and percentages; odds ratios and 95 % confidence intervals)
| Food insecurity | Undesirable diet diversity | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | n | % | OR | 95 % CI | P | OR | 95 % CI | P |
| (a) Bududa district | ||||||||
| Disaster effect | ||||||||
| Controls | 270 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Affect | 285 | 0·82 | 0·33, 2·06 | 0·67 | 4·22 | 2·65, 6·72 | <0·01 | |
| Head of the household | ||||||||
| Male | 373 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Female | 182 | 0·96 | 0·42, 2·23 | 0·93 | 0·73 | 0·48, 1·10 | 0·14 | |
| Education of the head of the household | ||||||||
| Beyond primary | 74 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Primary and below | 481 | 2·23 | 0·48, 10·31 | 0·31 | 0·91 | 0·51, 1·62 | 0·75 | |
| Main source of livelihood | ||||||||
| Others | 55 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Farming | 500 | 0·37 | 0·l2, 1·14 | 0·08 | 2·52 | 1·37, 4·64 | <0·01 | |
| Had a food security-relevant asset | ||||||||
| Yes | 110 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| No | 445 | 0·54 | 0·20, 1·43 | 0·22 | 0·89 | 0·50, 1·61 | 0·71 | |
| Had received relief food in the last 3 years | ||||||||
| No | 463 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Yes | 92 | 0·16 | 0·02, 1·23 | 0·08 | 1·05 | 0·58, 1·89 | 0·87 | |
| Age (years) | 555 | 0·98 | 0·96, 1·01 | 0·13 | 1·01 | <1·00, 1·02 | 0·09 | |
| Household size | 555 | 1·15 | 1·00, 1·32 | <0·05 | 0·93 | 0·87, <1·00 | 0·04 | |
| Diet diversity scores | 555 | 0·89 | 0·73, 1·08 | 0·22 | ||||
| Food insecurity scores | 555 | 1·00 | 0·97, 1·04 | 0·99 | ||||
| Hosmer and Lemeshow test (P) | 0·99 | 0·73 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke’s R 2 | 0·09 | 9 | 0·18 | |||||
| Overall predictive accuracy (%) | 95 | 72 | ||||||
| (b) Kiryandongo district | ||||||||
| Disaster effect | ||||||||
| Controls | 259 | 1 | 0·04 | 1 | 0·23 | |||
| Affect | 259 | 0·24 | 0·08, 0·95 | 0·55 | 0·21, 1·47 | |||
| Head of household | ||||||||
| Male | 270 | 1 | <0·05 | 1 | 0·54 | |||
| Female | 248 | 1·56 | 1·01, 2·42 | 0·89 | 0·61, 1·29 | |||
| Education attained | ||||||||
| Beyond primary | 71 | 1 | 0·10 | 1 | 0·03 | |||
| Primary and below | 447 | 1·93 | 0·87, 4·25 | 0·54 | 0·31, 0·93 | |||
| Main source of livelihood | ||||||||
| Others | 75 | 1 | 0·34 | 1 | 0·04 | |||
| Farming | 443 | 1·39 | 0·71, 2·72 | 0·59 | 0·35, 0·98 | |||
| Had a food security-relevant asset | ||||||||
| Yes | 225 | 1 | 0·50 | 1 | <0·01 | |||
| No | 293 | 0·86 | 0·54, 1·35 | 0·56 | 0·39, 0·81 | |||
| Had received relief food in the last 3 years | ||||||||
| No | 273 | 1 | 0·16 | 1 | 0·11 | |||
| Yes | 245 | 2·43 | 0·70, 8·42 | 2·19 | 0·84, 5·75 | |||
| Age (years) | 518 | 0·99 | 0·97, 1·01 | 0·27 | 0·99 | 0·97, 1·00 | <0·05 | |
| Household size | 518 | 1·00 | 0·93, 1·09 | 0·92 | 0·94 | 0·88, >1·00 | 0·07 | |
| HFIS | 518 | 1·00 | 0·98, 1·03 | 0·94 | ||||
| HDDS | 518 | 1·05 | 0·96, 1·15 | 0·32 | ||||
| Hosmer and Lemeshow test (P) | 0·57 | 0·17 | ||||||
| Nagelkerke’s R 2 | 0·05 | 5 | 0·10 | |||||
| Overall predictive accuracy (%) | 0·79 | 79 | 63 | |||||
HFIS, household food insecurity scale; HDDS, household diet diversity score.