Table 2. The association between low executive function and sexual risk outcomes, among 853 young women in rural South Africa, 2013–2015.
| Outcome | Full sample PR (95% CI) |
p | Age 18–19 PR (95% CI) |
p | Age 20–25 PR (95% CI) |
p | LRT X2 | LRT p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I. Rule-finding test1 | ||||||||
| Unprotected sex | 1.4 (1.0, 1.8) | 0.02 | 2.3 (1.2, 4.2) | 0.007 | 1.2 (0.9, 1.6) | 0.2 | 3.5588 | 0.06 |
| Concurrency | 1.1 (0.7, 1.6) | 0.7 | 2.4 (1.0, 5.8) | 0.06 | 0.9 (0.6, 1.4) | 0.7 | 4.062 | 0.04 |
| Transactional sex | 1.1 (0.8, 1.5) | 0.6 | 2.6 (1.3, 5.3) | 0.009 | 0.9 (0.7, 1.3) | 0.6 | 6.562 | 0.01 |
| HSV-2 | 1.4 (0.8, 2.6) | 0.2 | 2.7 (0.6, 11.7) | 0.2 | 1.3 (0.7, 2.4) | 0.5 | 0.9102 | 0.3 |
| II. Trail-making test1 | ||||||||
| Unprotected sex | 1.1 (0.7, 1.5) | 0.8 | 1.6 (0.8, 3.0) | 0.2 | 0.9 (0.6, 1.4) | 0.7 | 0.7352 | 0.4 |
| Concurrency | 1.6 (1.1, 2.5) | 0.02 | 2.1 (0.9, 5.3) | 0.1 | 1.5 (0.9, 2.5) | 0.09 | 0.0178 | 0.9 |
| Transactional sex | 1.7 (1.3, 2.4) | 0.0005 | 2.2 (1.1, 4.4) | 0.03 | 1.7 (1.2, 2.4) | 0.005 | 0.3304 | 0.6 |
| HSV-2 | 0.9 (0.4, 1.9) | 0.7 | - | 1.2 (0.5, 2.6) | 0.7 | - | - | |
| III. Figure drawing test2 | ||||||||
| Unprotected sex | 1.2 (0.9, 1.6) | 0.3 | 1.8 (0.8, 4.4) | 0.2 | 1.1 (0.8, 1.5) | 0.7 | 0.3602 | 0.6 |
| Concurrency | 1.7 (1.0, 2.7) | 0.04 | 2.7 (0.6, 11,0) | 0.2 | 1.5 (0.9, 2.6) | 0.1 | 0.4148 | 0.5 |
| Transactional sex | 1.3 (0.9, 2.0) | 0.1 | 2.4 (0.8, 7.3) | 0.1 | 1.2 (0.8, 1.8) | 0.3 | 0.8856 | 0.4 |
| HSV-2 | 0.7 (0.4, 1.2) | 0.2 | 0.8 (0.2, 4.1) | 0.8 | 0.7 (0.3, 1.3) | 0.2 | 0.0004 | 1.0 |
1Associations for the rule-finding and trail-making tests calculated comparing those who scored in the lowest test quintile to those in the highest four quintiles
2Associations for the figure drawing test calculated comparing those who scored in the lowest four test quintiles to those in the highest quintile
LRT = likelihood ratio test to examine whether the addition of an interaction term between an age indicator for age 18–19 and executive function test score improved model fit over a model without the interaction term. Smaller p-values indicate more improvement in model fit with addition of interaction term.