Table 2. Association between bridge width and person-specific characteristics among participants reporting more than one partner in the previous 3 years.
| Variables | Crude EBWR (95% CI) |
|
|---|---|---|
| Men | Women | |
| Age | 1.03 (1.01 - 1.04) | 1.02 (0.99 - 1.05) |
| Highest level of education | ||
| None or Primary | Ref | Ref |
| Secondary or Tertiary | 0.81 (0.60 - 1.09) | 0.80 (0.53 - 1.22) |
| Religion | ||
| Anglican | Ref | Ref |
| Other | 1.13 (0.78 - 1.65) | 0.90 (0.52 - 1.55) |
| Electrified home | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 0.80 (0.54 - 1.18) | 0.92 (0.50 - 1.69) |
| Owns own home | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 1.16 (0.77 - 1.74) | 1.44 (0.76 - 2.72) |
| Marital status | ||
| Never Married | Ref | Ref |
| Divorced, Widowed, Separated | 1.00 (0.44 - 2.26) | 1.09 (0.60 - 2.01) |
| Married | 1.38 (1.02 - 1.87) | 0.89 (0.57 - 1.38) |
| Condom use | ||
| Never used a condom with partners | Ref | Ref |
| Used condoms at some point | 0.86 (0.59 - 1.25) | 1.18 (0.74 - 1.88) |
| Non-spousal relationships | ||
| Had a non-spousal partner | Ref | Ref |
| Only had spousal partners | 1.05 (0.73 - 1.50) | 0.49 (0.20 - 1.20) |
| Had a once-off relationship | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 1.14 (0.83 - 1.55) | 0.83 (0.50 - 1.37) |
| Had a concurrent relationship in past 3 years | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 1.43 (1.06 - 1.92) | 1.01 (0.68 - 1.50) |
| At least 1 partner definitely had another partner | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 1.28 (0.93 - 1.75) | 1.22 (0.82 - 1.81) |
| Have a partner that currently resides outside of Likoma | ||
| No | Ref | Ref |
| Yes | 0.78 (0.58 - 1.05) | 0.83 (0.55 - 1.26) |
These are pooled estimates from 50 imputed datasets.
EBWR, Expected Bridge Width Ratio.
CI, Confidence Interval.