Table 3. Sociodemographic characteristics of households completing household interview at time of selection and at INDEP interview1, and associations with household care status (weighted analysis2).
Peru urban | Peru rural | Mexico urban | Mexico rural | China urban | China rural | All sites | Association (PR) with household care status (incident and chronic care vs no care) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of households (weighted number) | 140 (705) | 56 (371) | 189 (620) | 167 (610) | 176 (508) | 144 (587) | 872 (3401) | |
At household selection | ||||||||
Mean number of residents (SD) | 4.4 (2.1) | 4.0 (2.4) | 4.0 (2.8) | 3.4 (1.9) | 2.8 (1.2) | 3.9 (1.7) | 3.7 (1.7) | 1.04 (0.99–1.08) |
Co-resident children aged <16 years (%) | 52.1 | 41.8 | 34.2 | 27.0 | 8.3 | 22.8 | 31.6 | 1.07 (0.87–1.31) |
Index older person’s (IOP) living arrangements | ||||||||
Alone (%) | 8.0 | 14.6 | 14.7 | 8.0 | 5.5 | 7.2 | 9.4 | 1 (ref) |
With spouse only (%) | 10.5 | 4.9 | 6.6 | 12.8 | 30.5 | 21.3 | 14.4 | 1.73 (1.06–2.84) |
With adult children +/- others (%) | 58.4 | 63.3 | 63.9 | 65.6 | 48.8 | 59.3 | 60.0 | 1.70 (1.08–2.68) |
Other arrangement (%) | 23.2 | 17.3 | 17.3 | 13.6 | 15.2 | 12.3 | 16.2 | 1.78 (1.10–2.90) |
Mean assets (SD)3 | 6.2 (0.5) | 4.9 (1.0) | 6.0 (1.0) | 4.0 (1.8) | 5.4 (0.6) | 5.5 (1.3) | 5.4 (1.4) | 0.99 (0.93–1.06) |
Highest occupational status among IOPs (skilled or manual labourer %) | 27.9 | 91.3 | 60.4 | 91.3 | 42.4 | 96.1 | 66.1 | 1.04 (0.96–1.13)4 |
At INDEP interview | ||||||||
Household change (%) | 1.8 | 2.2 | 2.4 | 13.7 | 5.2 | 35.1 | 8.9 | 1.12 (0.83–1.52) |
Mean number of residents | 4.4 (2.4) | 4.3 (2.4) | 3.3 (1.9) | 3.8 (2.3) | 2.6 (1.3) | 4.1 (1.6) | 3.7 (2.1) | 1.01 (0.97–1.06) |
Mean change in number of residents from baseline | -0.1 (2.0) | +0.3 (1.7) | -0.7 (3.0) | +0.5 (2.8) | -0.3 (1.1) | +0.3 (1.8) | 0.0 (2.3) | 0.98 (0.94–1.02) |
Mean assets (SD)3 | 9.1 (1.3) | 7.2 (2.5) | 8.2 (1.4) | 6.4 (1.8) | 8.4 (1.5) | 8.6 (1.9) | 8.0 (2.0) | 0.99 (0.94–1.04) |
1. Households were selected from the incidence wave of the 10/66 survey, and data on household characteristics were collected at that time. Recontacting for INDEP interviews was carried out three years later.
2. Weighted for sampling fraction, and response.
3. An extended assets scale was used for the INDEP survey, and 10/66 survey and INDEP survey assets data are therefore not directly comparable.
4. Per occupational status level.