Table 2.
Logistic regression of skilled birth attendance for the women’s recent birth and their empowerment, socio-economic and partner’s factors (DHS 2011)
| Model (1) | Model (2) | Model (3) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | OR | 95 % CI | OR | 95 % CI | OR | 95 % CI |
| Participates in decision making in any of the four issues (rc = no) | 0.93 | [0.49–1.76] | 1.07 | [0.61–1.88] | 1.09 | [0.62–1.92] |
| Economically empowered - owns house or land or earns cash (rc = no) | 0.48** | [0.27–0.83] | 0.49* | [0.28–0.86] | 0.51* | [0.29–0.88] |
| Can refuse sex and ask partner to use condom (rc = no) | 1.64** | [1.21–2.22] | 1.28 | [0.91–1.81] | 1.26 | [0.89–1.78] |
| Experienced intimate partner violence in 12 months (rc = no) | 0.71 | [0.47–1.08] | 0.86 | [0.57–1.30] | 0.86 | [0.57–1.29] |
| Access to health facility is a big problem due to distance & finances (rc = no) | 0.72 | [0.51–1.02] | 0.98 | [0.67–1.43] | 0.97 | [0.66–1.43] |
| Attended ANC four or more times (rc = no) | 2.01*** | [1.39–2.90] | 1.93*** | [1.34–2.79] | ||
| Wealth index (rc = poorest) | ||||||
| Poorer | 1.46 | [0.89–2.41] | 1.33 | [0.79–2.26] | ||
| Middle | 1.51 | [0.87–2.60] | 1.40 | [0.80–2.46] | ||
| Rich | 2.84*** | [1.58–5.12] | 2.59** | [1.41–4.76] | ||
| Women’s education level (rc = none) | ||||||
| Primary | 1.37 | [0.86–2.19] | 1.17 | [0.70–1.95] | ||
| Secondary or higher | 2.54** | [1.36–4.74] | 1.86 | [0.94–3.65] | ||
| Number of children ever born (rc = 1) | ||||||
| 2–4 | 0.38** | [0.21–0.71] | 0.40** | [0.22–0.74] | ||
| 5+ | 0.37** | [0.20–0.70] | 0.40** | [0.21–0.75] | ||
| Partner’s education level (rc = none) | ||||||
| Primary | 1.52 | [0.84–2.74] | ||||
| Secondary or higher | 2.31* | [1.18–4.50] | ||||
| Observations | 897 | 897 | 897 |
* p < 0.05- ** p < 0.01-
*** p < 0.001; rc = reference category
OR Odds Ratios
CI confidence interval
Model 1- Considered main predictor variables
Model 2- added women’s factors
Model 3- added partners’ education