Table 1.
Demographic characteristics of sample (N = 648)a
| Demographic category | Frequency (Percentage)
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pregnant
|
Non-pregnant
|
|
|||
| SPB1 (N = 146) |
NNR2 (N = 155) |
SPB3 (N = 196) |
NNR4 (N = 151) |
Total (N = 648) | |
| Average age in years (SD) | 26.9 (4.8)4 | 28.1 (5.6)4 | 26.5 (6.3)4 | 31.9 (6.5)1,2,3 | 28.2 (6.2) |
| Age range | [18.4–40.9] | [18.2–44.0] | [18.0–43.5] | [18.1–43.9] | [18.0–44.0] |
| Marital status | |||||
| Married | 98 (67.1%)3,4 | 124 (80.0%)3,4 | 65 (33.2%)1,2 | 63 (41.7%)1,2 | 350 (54.0%) |
| Cohabitating | 34 (23.3%) | 16 (10.3%) | 34 (17.3%) | 32 (21.2%) | 116 (17.9%) |
| Single/divorced b | 14 (9.6%) | 15 (9.7%) | 96 (49.0%) | 56 (37.1%) | 181 (27.9%) |
| Living environmentc | |||||
| Urban inner city | 141 (96.6%) | 84 (54.2%)3 | 190 (96.9%)2,4 | 95 (62.9%)3 | 510 (78.7%) |
| Rural/small city/suburban | 5 (3.4%) | 71 (45.8%) | 5 (3.1%) | 56 (37.1%) | 137 (21.3%) |
| Education | |||||
| No school diploma | 0 (0.0%)2,4 | 4 (2.6%)1,3 | 2 (1.0%)2,4 | 3 (1.2%)1,3 | 9 (1.4%) |
| School diploma | 17 (11.6%) | 91 (58.7%) | 34 (17.3%) | 93 (61.6%) | 235 (36.3%) |
| Middle level college | 61 (41.8%)2,4 | 5 (3.3%)1,3 | 72 (36.8%)2,4 | 1 (0.7%)1,3 | 139 (21.4%) |
| Higher education/Ph.D. | 68 (46.6%) | 55 (35.5%) | 87 (44.4%) | 54 (35.7%) | 264 (40.7%) |
| Employmentd | |||||
| Employed | 81 (55.5%)2,3,4 | 129 (83.2%)13 | 130 (66.3%)1,2,4 | 130 (86.1%)1,3 | 470 (72.5%) |
| Student | 11 (7.5%) | 6 (3.9%) | 41 (20.9%) | 11 (7.3%) | 69 (10.7%) |
| Homemaker | 18 (12.3%) | 13 (8.4%) | 9 (4.6%) | 5 (3.3%) | 45 (6.9%) |
| Maternity leave | 23 (15.8%) | 0 (0.0%) | 9 (4.6%) | 1 (0.7%) | 33 (5.1%) |
| Unemployed/disability | 13 (8.9%) | 7 (4.5%) | 5 (2.6%) | 4 (2.6%) | 29 (4.5%) |
| Household income/person | |||||
| < 3,000 rubles e | 8 (5.5%)2,4 | 48 (31.0%)1,3 | 21 (10.7%)2,4 | 79 (52.3%)1,3 | 156 (24.1%) |
| 3,000–5,000 rubles | 51 (34.9%) | 61 (39.4%) | 61 (31.1%) | 51 (33.8%) | 224 (34.6%) |
| 5,000–10,000 rubles | 55 (37.7%) | 30 (19.4%) | 74 (37.8%) | 11 (7.3%) | 170 (26.2%) |
| 10,000–18,000 > rubles | 30 (20.5%) | 7 (4.5%) | 30 (15.3%) | 9 (6.0%) | 76 (11.7%) |
| Missingf | 2 (1.4%) | 9 (5.8%) | 10 (5.1%) | 1 (0.7%) | 22 (3.4%) |
Numeric subscripts 1–4 represent four groups: 1 = pregnant women in St. Petersburg (SPB), 2 = pregnant women in the Nizhny Novgorod region (NNR), 3 = non-pregnant women in SPB, 4 = non-pregnant women in NNR. Subscripts in the table indicate which groups are significantly different (αset = 0.05) based on Bonferroni-adjusted Multiple Comparisons between the four groups. For example, the subscript shown on the column labeled “Pregnant (SBP1)” and row “Average age in years (SD)” with the figure 26.9 (4.8)4 means there is a significant difference in the average age of pregnant women in SBP versus non-pregnant women in NNR.
Single/divorced category also included separated and widowed.
The bottom three categories (rural, small city, suburban) were collapsed and logistic regression was performed to assess group differences in proportion of inner-city participant residents.
The bottom four categories were collapsed and logistic regression was performed to assess group differences in proportion gainfully employed.
Between September 2004 and May 2005, exchange rates were 27.5 to 29.2 rubles per U.S. dollar.
Missingness is suppressed for all but the income variable, due to minimal non-response (non-response ranged from 0 to 4 women on all other variables).