Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 25;15(6):e0235189. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235189

Table 5. Community malaria message processing and acceptance, Jimma Zone, SBCC target districts, 2017–19 (Baseline = 762, End-line = 759).

Perceptions and acceptance Weighted means and differences Change Statistical tests
Baseline End-line ES
Mean ±SD Mean ±SD % (95% CI) t/Chi-square p-value
Perceived Susceptibility 50.3 13.4 47.0 11.0 -3.3 (-5.7, -0.9) t = -5.21 0.01
Perceived Severity 84.4 15.0 83.4 12.3 -1.0 (-3.7, +1.7) t = 3.21 0.101
Perceived Threat (PT) 67.3 16.5 65.1 16.1 -2.2 (-2.8, -1.7) t = 6.72 0.012
Self-Efficacy 72.9 15.8 81.3 15.7 +8.4 (+8.3, +8.5) t = 7.97 <0.001
Response Efficacy (attitude) 95.2 3.9 91.4 6.1 -3.8 (-6.0, -1.6) t = -9.34 0.004
Perceived Efficacy (PE) 84.0 13.2 86.3 12.4 +2.3 (+1.7, +3.3) t = 10.31 <0.001
Message processing: DV = PE-PT
Discriminative Value (DV) 16.8 2.3 21.2 2.6 +4.5 (+4.1, +4.7) t = 7.25 0.01
Message acceptance* No. % No % % (95% CI)
Fear control (DV≤0) 195 25.8 120 15.8 -10.0 (-16.0,-4.0) x2 = 8.79 0.01
Danger Control (DV>0) 564 74.2 640 84.2 +10.0 (4.0, 16.0) x2 = 8.79 0.01

* The mean and SD are replaced by number and percent, respectively for message acceptance.