Table 3. Binary logistic regression analyses.
Binary logistic regression analyses showing factors influencing unmet need for contraception in sexually active Cambodian females aged 15–29 years.
| Factors influencing unmet need for contraception |
Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR), 95% Confidence Interval (CI) with p-values (N = 4416) Model I |
|---|---|
| Individual level of Social Ecological Modela | |
| Age Group | |
| 15–19 years 20–24 years 25–29 years (base) |
1.9 (1.3–2.8) P = 0.001 1.4 (1.1–1.8) P = 0.01 |
| Region | |
| Urban Rural (base) |
1.05 (0.7–1.5) P = 0.7 |
| Employment | |
| Yes No (base) |
0.6 (0.5–0.8) P = 0.001 |
| Parity | |
| 1–2 children 3 or more children No children (base) |
1.9 (1.4–2.8) P = 0.001 3.3 (2.1–5.3) P = 0.001 |
| Microenvironment levelof Social Ecological Modela | |
| Decision for family size | |
| Husband wants more children Husband wants fewer children Do not know Both want same number of children (base) |
1.3 (1.0–1.8) P=0.04 1.1 (0.6–1.9) P = 0.7 1.0 (0.7–1.5) P = 0.9 |
| Person deciding about woman’s access to healthcare (n = 4448 for Model I) | |
| Respondent and husband together Husband alone Someone else in the family Respondent alone (base) |
0.9 (0.7–1.2) P = 0.6 0.8 (0.5–1.3) P = 0.5 2.0 (1.1–4.1) P = 0.03 |
| Person deciding about major household items purchase(n = 4446 for Model I) | |
| Respondent and husband together Husband alone Someone else in the family Respondent alone (base) |
0.9 (0.6–1.3) P = 0.6 0.6 (0.3–1.0) P = 0.07 2.0 (1.0–4.1) P = 0.05 |
| Person deciding about major household items purchase(n = 4446 for Model I) | |
| Respondent and husband together Husband alone Someone else in the family Respondent alone (base) |
0.9 (0.6–1.3) P = 0.6 0.6 (0.3–1.0) P = 0.07 2.0 (1.0–4.1) P = 0.05 |
| Macroenvironment levelof Social Ecological Modela | |
| Participants heard about family planning media messages on radio in the last three months | |
| Yes No (base) Participants heard about family planning media messages on television in the last three months Yes No (base) |
0.9 (0.7–1.2) P = 0.6 1.0 (0.8–1.3) P = 0.8 |
| Accessible distance to health facility and getting medical help for herself (n = 4823 for Model I) | |
| Not difficult Very difficult (base) |
0.8 (0.6–1.0) P = 0.05 |
| At the health facility, participants told about family planning (n = 4822 for Model I) | |
| Yes No (base) |
1.1 (0.9–1.4) P = 0.3 |
Notes.
Model I: Number of strata = 38; Number of PSUs = 608; Number of observations = 4,416; Degree of freedom (df) = 570, F = 4.47, Prob > F = 0.000, P-value significant (shown in bold) if P < 0.05.
Bronfenbrenner’s social ecological model used as theoretical framework with three levels (Individual level, microenvironment level, macroenvironment level.
Hosmer-Lemeshaw goodness-of-fit test for logistic model: F(9, 562) = 0.8, Prob >F = 0.6.
Data used from 2014 Cambodian Demographic and Health Survey (CDHS).
There are 407 missing values in the variables “person to decide for respondent’s health care” and “person deciding about major household item purchase” in the dataset.