Table 5.
Variablea | Coef. | Clustered robust SE | p value | 95% confidence interval | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
In-group biasb | 0.139 | 0.059 | 0.025 | 0.019 | 0.259 |
Selected by local councilc | − 0.085 | 0.053 | 0.121 | − 0.194 | 0.024 |
Friends help with MDAd | 0.084 | 0.040 | 0.041 | 0.004 | 0.165 |
Female | − 0.120 | 0.057 | 0.043 | − 0.235 | − 0.004 |
Fisherman/fishmongere | 0.149 | 0.040 | 0.001 | 0.067 | 0.232 |
Household uses protected drinking water source | 0.134 | 0.040 | 0.002 | 0.053 | 0.216 |
Network betweennessf | 0.030 | 0.008 | 0.001 | 0.013 | 0.047 |
Constant | 0.095 | 0.050 | 0.067 | − 0.007 | 0.197 |
Obs. 59, R2 = 0.331, F-stat. 13.69, F-stat. p value < 0.0001. Root mean squared error (RMSE) from 8-fold cross-validation = 0.183. Variables selected through Lasso with 8-fold cross-validation. Mean squared error (MSE) of Lasso cross-validation = 0.076
aThe results shown are from an ordinary least squares regression with standard errors clustered by the village
bIn-group bias is positive if the CMD was altruistic towards their friends and not altruistic towards strangers
cThe base category includes CMD selection by community meeting or direct nomination from a village health team member
dMDA = mass drug administration
eThe base category for these occupations includes all other CMD occupations
fNetwork betweenness was not significant (p value > 0.05) when one outlier was removed (Additional file 1: Table S4) 58/59 CMDs had network betweenness ≤ 3 whilst 1/59 CMDs had network betweenness = 11.58