Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Feb 1.
Published in final edited form as: Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2015 Sep;41(3):145–154. doi: 10.1363/4114515

Table 1.

Percentage distribution of all eligible women, and percentage distribution of study participants, by contraceptive use, Karonga Prevention Study, Malawi, 2012

Characteristic All eligible women Participants
All Contraceptive users Contraceptive nonusers
Marital status*** (N=7,362) (N=4,593) (N=1,981) (N=2,612)
Currently married   66.9   73.3   86.1   63.6
Separated/widowed/divorced   13.5   13.2   11.1   14.9
Never married   19.6   13.5     2.8   21.6
Proximity to road** (N=7,388) (N=4,602) (N=1,984) (N=2,618)
<1km   47.9   44.3   46.7   42.5
>1km   52.1   55.7   53.3   57.5
Proximity to family planning provider*** (N=7,388) (N=4,595) (N=1,987) (N=2,608)
<0.5km   39.1   39.5   42.6   37.2
0.5–1.5km   54.7   54.0   52.0   55.6
>1.5km     6.2     6.4     5.4     7.2
Education** (N=7,379) (N=4,598) (N=1,983) (N=2,615)
Incomplete primary     7.4     7.6     6.3     8.6
Complete primary   57.0   61.4   63.3   60.0
≥secondary   35.6   30.9   30.4   31.4
HIV status (N=6,396) (N=4075) (N=1,837) (N=2,238)
Positive     8.9     9.0     8.4     9.4
Negative   91.1   91.0   91.6   90.6
Parity*** (N=5,416) (N=3,747) (N=1903) (N=1,844)
0     3.4     2.7     2.9     2.5
1–4   61.5   58.8   61.6   55.9
≥5   35.2   38.5   35.5   41.6
Fertility intention*** (N=5,013) (N=3,361) (N=1,525) (N=1,836)
No more children   42.1   45.7   53.5   39.3
Wait ≥2 years   37.8   35.6   35.0   36.1
Want within two years   12.7   12.7     8.4   16.3
Unsure     7.4     6.0     3.1     8.3
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
**

Difference between contraceptive users and nonusers significant at p<.01.

***

Difference between contraceptive users and nonusers significant at p<.001.

Includes users of condoms (male and female) and traditional methods.