Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 10;13(1):e0189475. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189475

Table 3. Bivariate and multivariate regression analysis of factors associated with the understanding of the instructions for use among the 322 study participants.

Characteristic Understanding of the instructions of use£
n (%) Total cOR [95% CI] P* aOR [95% CI] P**
Age (years)
18–29 157 (79.7) 197 1.03 [0.59–1.79] < 0.01 Reference -
30–39 70 (87.5) 80 2.43 [1.14–5.17] < 0.01 2.73 [1.07–7.00] 0.056
≥ 40 29 (64.4) 45 0.35 [0.18–0.70] < 0.01 0.66 [0.26–1.69] 0.291
Educational levelμ
Low 39 (73.6) 53 0.67 [0.34–1.32] < 0.0001 0.41 [0.12–1.46] 0.170
Middle 102 (71.8) 142 0.43 [0.25–0.75] < 0.0001 0.46 [0.18–1.20] 0.111
High 115 (90.6) 127 3.67 [1.87–7.19] < 0.0001 Reference -
Language used
French 142 (89.9) 158 3.59 [1.96–6.57] < 0.0001 Reference -
Lingala 34 (61.8) 55 0.29 [0.15–0.54] < 0.0001 0.31 [0.12–0.81] 0.017
Swahili 80 (73.4) 109 0.68 [0.39–1.19] < 0.0001 0.35 [0.14–0.92] 0.034

£ The correct answers to a minimum of five questions were considered to have understood the instructions for use;

* P-value calculated using Pearson’s χ2 test or Fisher’s exact test;

** P-value calculated using logistic regression analysis;

μ Educational level was categorized according to the educational system of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as follows: (i) low: unschooled or attending primary school; (ii) middle: attending college or technical school; and (iii) high: attending Bachelor’s or graduate degree.

aOR: adjusted odds ratios; cOR: crude odds ratios; CI: confidence interval; P: P-value.