Table 2.
Regression results describing the association between chicken management practices and measures of exposure to environmental contamination
| Outcome Variables | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No feces visible | Child’s hands are clean | ||||
| Exposure Variables | Unadjusted | Adjusted | Unadjusted | Adjusted | |
| % (n) | |||||
| Among all households | |||||
| Has a chicken coop | 0.65*** | 0.70*** | 0.93 | 0.94 | |
| 83.7 (814) | (0.52–0.82) | (0.55–0.91) | (0.78–1.10) | (0.80–1.09) | |
| Number of chickens | |||||
| Referent: Category = 1, 1–3 chickens | 41.4 (403) | ||||
| Category = 2, 4–9 chickens | 25.1 (244) | 0.96 | 1.01 | 0.92 | 0.93 |
| (0.78–1.18) | (0.83–1.23) | (0.76–1.12) | (0.75–1.15) | ||
| Category = 3, 10+ chickens | 33.5 (326) | 0.76** | 0.79** | 0.99 | 0.97 |
| (0.60–0.98) | (0.65–0.95) | (0.85–1.17) | (0.81–1.17) | ||
| Chickens did not sleep in house last night | 37.6 (366) | 1.82*** | 1.66*** | 1.12 | 1.03 |
| (1.39–2.37) | (1.22–2.25) | (0.96–1.31) | (0.89–1.19) | ||
| Among households with a chicken coop | |||||
| Type of coop | |||||
| Referent: open housing | 49.8 (405) | ||||
| Enclosed housing | 38.3 (312) | 1.80*** | 1.83*** | 1.06 | 1.08*** |
| (1.41–2.30) | (1.45–2.32) | (0.84–1.34) | (1.07–1.10) | ||
| Fencing | 6.4 (52) | 1.30 | 1.54 | 1.21 | 1.42*** |
| (0.71–2.36) | (0.90–2.63) | (0.93–1.57) | (1.32–1.52) | ||
| Other | 5.5 (45) | 1.40 | 1.65 | 1.13 | 1.27** |
| (0.68–2.89) | (0.90–3.03) | (0.86–1.49) | (1.05–1.54) | ||
| Distance from house to coop | |||||
| Referent: 0 meters | 44.5 (362) | ||||
| 1–3 meters | 29.1 (237) | 1.83*** | 1.56*** | 1.26** | 1.29** |
| (1.33–2.52) | (1.19–2.05) | (1.05–1.51) | (1.04–1.61) | ||
| 4+ meters | 26.4 (215) | 1.43* | 1.37* | 1.23* | 1.24 |
| (0.96–2.13) | (0.98–1.88) | (0.98–1.53) | (0.95–1.63) | ||
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1. Risk ratios shown, with robust 95% confidence intervals clustered at the village level in parentheses. Control variables in adjusted regressions included: region, agroecology, treatment group, wealth quintile, woman-headed household, tertiles of number of household members, tertiles of the number of livestock owned (excluding chickens), education category of woman of reproductive age, tertiles of women’s empowerment in chicken production score, education category of household head, improved water, improved sanitation. The outcome of whether the child’s hands are clean is among a subsample of households that had an index child 0–36 months of age