Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Ecohealth. 2016 Oct 31;14(1):7–19. doi: 10.1007/s10393-016-1190-0

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for Cooking-Related Exposures and Household Demographicsa,b.

Pooled sample Rural Urban Range
Main fuel used by household (%)
 High-quality firewood 28.1 42.2 8.4 0–1
 Low-quality firewood 31.5 53.1 1.1 0–1
 Charcoal 38.3 1.3 90.1 0–1
 Crop residue 2.1 3.4 0.4 0–1
Main stove type used by household (%)
 Traditional three-stone fire 56.6 89.8 10.3 0–1
 Metal charcoal stove 38.0 1.8 88.6 0–1
 Other (e.g., fixed mud stoves, hot plate) 5.3 8.4 1.1 0–1
Cooking environment and other environmental exposures
 Indoor cooking (vs. fully or partially outdoors) (%) 61.1 84.8 27.8 0–1
 Cooking area well ventilated (%) 86.4 81.2 93.8 0–1
 Household owns biomass burning industry (%) 37.6 46.3 25.3 0–1
 Primary cook burns garbage (%) 71.2 86.1 50.2 0–1
 Primary cook’s time spent walking on tarmac roads daily (in minutes) 2.5 (11.6) 0.0 (0.0) 6.0 (17.4) 0–168
Demographic variables
 Age of primary cook (years) 37.3 (13.8) 41.5 (15.0) 31.6 (9.7) 17–72
 Education of primary cook (%) 0–2
  None 13.9 18.9 7.0
  Some primary education 63.4 72.8 50.2
  Some secondary education 22.8 8.4 42.9
 Household size (number of household members) 5.7 (2.4) 5.8 (2.5) 5.5 (2.2) 1–15
 Household assets (number of household assets currently owned) 17.2 (10.3) 13.3 (8.1) 22.7 (10.6) 1–40
N 655 382 273
a

Difference of means test (t test) was conducted for all continuous variables, and Pearson’s χ2 tests for all categorical variables. Rural and urban samples are statistically significantly different at the 0.01 level for all variables except household size.

b

Standard deviations in parentheses.