Table 4.
Factors associated with sufficient ANC visits among women in Nepal, NDHS 2016.
| Characteristics | Sufficient ANC Visits; AOR (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Alternative Model | |
| Socio-demographic characteristics | ||||
| Age group (years) | p = 0.769 | p = 0.966 | p = 0.936 | P = 0.945 |
| 15–24 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 25–34 | 1.08 (0.74–1.57) | 1.04 (0.72–1.51) | 1.06 (0.74–1.53) | 1.06 (0.73–1.53) |
| 35–49 | 0.93 (0.55–1.58) | 1.02 (0.59–1.74) | 1.04 (0.60–1.80) | 1.03 (0.60–1.79) |
| Caste/Ethnicity | p < 0.001 | p = 0.001 | p = 0.003 | p = 0.003 |
| Other castes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Brahmin/Chhetri | 2.72 (1.67–4.41) | 2.55 (1.55–4.20) | 2.34 (1.42–3.84) | 2.34 (1.42–3.88) |
| Janajati (Indigenous) | 1.48 (0.89–2.46) | 1.40 (0.84–2.36) | 1.33 (0.79–2.23) | 1.33 (0.80–2.21) |
| Dalit | 1.79 (1.04–3.10) | 1.75 (0.99–3.08) | 1.70 (0.95–3.04) | 1.71 (0.96–3.03) |
| Place of residence | p = 0.034 | p = 0.034 | p = 0.028 | p = 0.026 |
| Urban | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Rural | 0.70 (0.50–0.97) | 0.70 (0.50–0.97) | 0.69 (0.50–0.96) | 0.69 (0.50–0.95) |
| Household wealth status | p < 0.001 | p = 0.002 | p = 0.001 | p = 0.002 |
| Rich | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Middle | 0.64 (0.41–1.00) | 0.67 (0.43–1.06) | 0.67 (0.43–1.06) | 0.68 (0.43–1.07) |
| Poor | 0.41 (0.28–0.60) | 0.48 (0.32–0.72) | 0.47 (0.31–0.70) | 0.47 (0.31–0.71) |
| Education differences | p = 0.001 | p = 0.008 | p = 0.007 | p = 0.006 |
| Both uneducated | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Both equally educated | 2.55 (1.48–4.39) | 2.31 (1.32–4.05) | 2.31 (1.33–4.02) | 2.33 (1.33–4.06) |
| Husband better educated | 1.32 (0.82–2.13) | 1.27 (0.78–2.06) | 1.25 (0.77–2.03) | 1.26 (0.77–2.05) |
| Wife better educated | 1.83 (0.97–3.48) | 1.68 (0.88–3.23) | 1.68 (0.89–3.14) | 1.66 (0.88–3.13) |
| No of living children | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 | p < 0.001 |
| 3 or more children | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| 2 or fewer children | 2.43 (1.68–3.52) | 2.03 (1.39–2.96) | 2.10 (1.44–3.08) | 2.10 (1.43–3.08) |
| Women’s autonomy related | ||||
| Exposure to media | p = 0.013 | p = 0.017 | p = 0.016 | |
| No exposure | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Exposure | 1.52 (1.09–2.12) | 1.50 (1.07–2.09) | 1.50 (1.08–2.10) | |
| Pregnancy intentions | p = 0.011 | p = 0.016 | p = 0.014 | |
| Unintended | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Intended | 2.02 (1.17–3.46) | 1.96 (1.13–3.40) | 1.97 (1.14–3.10) | |
| Violence related | ||||
| Partner control behavior | p = 0.029 | p = 0.029 | ||
| No behavior | 1 | 1 | ||
| 1–2 behavior | 0.64 (0.45–0.92) | 0.63 (0.44–0.89) | ||
| 3–5 behavior | 1.17 (0.64–2.13) | 1.01 (0.58–1.77) | ||
| Physical IPV | p = 0.836 | NA | ||
| No | 1 | |||
| Yes | 0.94 (0.56–1.58) | |||
| Sexual IPV | p = 0.519 | NA | ||
| No | 1 | |||
| Yes | 0.80 (0.40–1.57) | |||
| Emotional IPV | p = 0.485 | NA | ||
| No | 1 | |||
| Yes | 0.82 (0.47–1.42) | |||
| Any IPV | NA | p = 0.592 | ||
| No | 1 | |||
| Yes | 0.89 (0.58–1.35) | |||
| Nagelkerke’s R-square | 0.211 | 0.227 | 0.239 | 0.237 |
Model 1: Age group, ethnicity, province, household wealth status, and witnessing parental violence. Model 2: Husband/Partner education, husband/partner alcohol use, women afraid of husband, marital control behavior displayed by the husband. Model 3: Education of women, exposure to media, women’s cash earnings, ownership of property, attitude towards the autonomy of sexual rights, and attitude towards wife beating. 1—reference category, p = p-value of the variables obtained from the test of model effects, IPV: Intimate Partner Violence. ANC: Antenatal Care, AOR: Adjusted Odds Ratio, CI: Confidence Interval. All values are weighted for the multi-stage sampling, cluster weight, and sampling weight.