Table 3.
Associations between SBCC, chicken ownership, and egg consumption
Country | Survey round | Group / Significance | SBCC association with | Chicken ownership association with | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Women's egg consumption | Children's egg consumption | Women's egg consumption | Children's egg consumption | |||
Burkina Faso | 1 | With | 15% | 60% | 14% | 57% |
Without | 7% | 40% | 7% | 27% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.059 | 0.001 | 0.28 | 0.001 | ||
2 | With | 60% | 86% | 37% | 81% | |
Without | 40% | 66% | 25% | 66% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.123 | 0.02 | ||
3 | With | 31% | 69% | 29% | 65% | |
Without | 16% | 50% | 10% | 5% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.079 | ||
Cote d'Ivoire | 1 | With | 25% | 45% | 27% | 54% |
Without | 6% | 32% | 13% | 27% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.000 | 0.057 | 0.001 | 0.000 | ||
2 | With | 45% | 60% | 46% | 60% | |
Without | 21% | 27% | 23% | 34% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||
3 | With | 30% | 31% | 30% | 35% | |
Without | 19% | 21% | 19% | 16% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.023 | 0.175 | 0.018 | 0.006 | ||
Senegal | 1 | With | 42% | 71% | 42% | 72% |
Without | 28% | 46% | 30% | 50% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.251 | 0.104 | 0.302 | 0.135 | ||
2 | With | 75% | 83% | |||
Without | 56% | 71% | ||||
P (χ 2) | 0.024 | 0.122 | ||||
3 | With | 74% | 77% | |||
Without | 52% | 43% | ||||
P (χ 2) | 0.031 | 0.003 | ||||
Tanzania | 2 | With | 10% | 32% | 11% | 26% |
Without | 4% | 7% | 4% | 22% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.293 | 0.001 | 0.134 | 0.538 | ||
3 | With | 14% | 42% | 12% | 45% | |
Without | 0% | 32% | 2% | 24% | ||
P (χ 2) | 0.006 | 0.244 | 0.072 | 0.02 |
Note. Table compares rates among those with chickens/those participating in SBCC with rates among those without chickens/not participating; probabilities associated with χ 2 tests are reported in bold for P < 0.1. All data come from the monitoring surveys described in the methods section. No data reported for Senegal, Waves 2 and 3, as nearly all households owned chickens. SBCC: social behaviour change communication.