Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Jul 29.
Published in final edited form as: Health Econ. 2017 Sep 7;27(3):622–628. doi: 10.1002/hec.3588

Table 2:

Impact of CGP on women’s report of intimate partner violence (age 15 – 49 years), using cross-sectional Ordinary Least Squares Regression at 48 months follow-up

(1) (2) (3) (4)
All women All women Married or co-habiting women Married or co-habiting women
Treatment (CGP participant) 0.019 0.012 −0.002 −0.011
(0.112) (0.111) (0.125) (0.124)
Asked violence set 0.134** 0.141** 0.124* 0.128*
(0.067) (0.066) (0.066) (0.066)
Treatment * Asked violence set 0.028 0.021 0.052 0.043
(0.100) (0.100) (0.102) (0.102)
Age (years, baseline) −0.002 −0.001
(0.004) (0.005)
Highest grade attained (baseline) 0.022** 0.025**
(0.009) (0.010)
Divorced/separated/widowed (baseline) 0.048
(0.074)
Log household size (baseline) 0.103 0.090
(0.100) (0.126)
Shang’ombo district −0.582*** −0.555*** −0.518*** −0.476***
(0.152) (0.153) (0.162) (0.163)
Kaputa district −0.594*** −0.585*** −0.535*** −0.519***
(0.141) (0.141) (0.153) (0.152)
Constant 2.210*** 1.972*** 2.188*** 1.922***
(0.122) (0.247) (0.142) (0.288)
Observations 2,171 2,171 1,617 1,617
R-squared 0.056 0.060 0.043 0.047
Joint F-test Asked violence set, Treatment* Asked violence set (p-value) 0.015 0.011 0.017 0.017

Notes: Robust standard errors clustered at the village level in parentheses;

***

p<0.01,

**

p<0.05,

*

p<0.10