TABLE 2.
Overall sample (inclusive of rural and urban districts) | ||||||
Model 1: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are stunted | Model 2: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are wasted | |||||
Covariates | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value |
Post-SBM (reference = pre-SBM) | 4.57 | −3.18, 12.33 | 0.247 | 1.74 | −6.61, 10.09 | 0.682 |
Baseline (pre-SBM) percentage of households with personal toilet | −0.01 | −0.06, 0.05 | 0.848 | −0.02 | −0.06, 0.02 | 0.380 |
SBM * baseline percentage of households with personal toilet (reference = pre-SBM) | −0.06 | −0.10, −0.01 | 0.009 | −0.01 | −0.04, 0.03 | 0.684 |
Percentage of households with clean water | −0.08 | −0.17, 0.01 | 0.094 | −0.05 | −0.12, 0.01 | 0.091 |
Percentage of households with clean cooking fuel | 0.05 | −0.02, 0.11 | 0.193 | 0.03 | −0.04, 0.10 | 0.458 |
Percentage of households with electricity | −0.05 | −0.11, 0.01 | 0.103 | −0.01 | −0.05, 0.04 | 0.707 |
Percentage of women with at least 10 y of schooling | −0.17 | −0.29, −0.05 | 0.007 | 0.02 | −0.09, 0.14 | 0.663 |
Percentage of institutional deliveries | −0.06 | −0.15, 0.04 | 0.257 | 0.00 | −0.06, 0.06 | 0.940 |
Percentage of women who reported 4 ANC visits during pregnancy | −0.05 | −0.12, 0.02 | 0.182 | −0.03 | −0.08, 0.03 | 0.377 |
Percentage of children who received full immunization | 0.00 | −0.13, 0.13 | 0.985 | −0.01 | −0.12, 0.09 | 0.791 |
District wealth decile | −1.66 | −3.27, −0.05 | 0.044 | −1.57 | −2.75, −0.38 | 0.009 |
Urban (reference = rural) | −0.15 | −2.56, 2.26 | 0.903 | −0.87 | −3.70, 1.96 | 0.548 |
Mean of dependent variable | 39.65 | 33.0 | ||||
Sample size | 2317 | 2310 | ||||
Rural | ||||||
Model 3: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are stunted | Model 4: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are wasted | |||||
Covariates | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value |
Post-SBM (reference = pre-SBM) | −4.67 | −8.00, −1.34 | 0.006 | −6.44 | −10.16, −2.72 | 0.00 |
Baseline (pre-SBM) percentage of households with personal toilet | 0.09 | −0.03, 0.21 | 0.162 | 0.05 | −0.06, 0.16 | 0.36 |
SBM * baseline percentage of households with personal toilet (reference = pre-SBM) | −0.05 | −0.10, −0.01 | 0.023 | −0.03 | −0.08, 0.02 | 0.27 |
Percentage of households with clean water | −0.09 | −0.23, 0.04 | 0.183 | −0.01 | −0.17, 0.15 | 0.89 |
Percentage of households with clean cooking fuel | −0.12 | −0.25, 0.01 | 0.073 | 0.20 | 0.00, 0.40 | 0.05 |
Percentage of households with electricity | −0.07 | −0.13, 0.00 | 0.048 | 0.05 | −0.01, 0.12 | 0.08 |
Percentage of women with at least 10 y of schooling | −0.17 | −0.36, 0.02 | 0.073 | 0.09 | −0.17, 0.34 | 0.50 |
Percentage of institutional deliveries | −0.08 | −0.21, 0.06 | 0.267 | 0.14 | 0.00, 0.29 | 0.05 |
Percentage of women who reported 4 ANC visits during pregnancy | 0.01 | −0.02, 0.04 | 0.337 | −0.05 | −0.08, −0.03 | 0.00 |
Percentage of children who received full immunization | −0.17 | −0.31, −0.03 | 0.015 | 0.00 | −0.15, 0.16 | 0.95 |
District wealth decile | −1.39 | −3.02, 0.23 | 0.093 | 0.15 | −1.68, 1.97 | 0.87 |
Mean of dependent variable | 42.62 | 21.94 | ||||
Sample size | 1169 | 1163 | ||||
Urban | ||||||
Model 5: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are stunted | Model 6: Outcome = percentage of u5 children who are wasted | |||||
Covariates | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value | Coefficient | 95% CI | P value |
Post-SBM (reference = pre-SBM) | −6.60 | −15.43, 2.23 | 0.143 | −5.58 | −13.07, 1.91 | 0.14 |
Baseline (pre-SBM) percentage of households with personal toilet | 0.10 | −0.08, 0.27 | 0.284 | 0.01 | −0.12, 0.14 | 0.86 |
SBM * baseline percentage of households with personal toilet (reference = pre-SBM) | −0.03 | −0.15, 0.09 | 0.577 | 0.02 | −0.08, 0.12 | 0.73 |
Percentage of households with clean water | −0.18 | −0.39, 0.03 | 0.088 | 0.01 | −0.12, 0.14 | 0.85 |
Percentage of households with clean cooking fuel | 0.13 | −0.09, 0.35 | 0.235 | 0.04 | −0.15, 0.24 | 0.65 |
Percentage of households with electricity | −0.18 | −0.33, −0.03 | 0.022 | 0.07 | −0.06, 0.19 | 0.32 |
Percentage of women with at least 10 y of schooling | −0.24 | −0.45, −0.03 | 0.024 | 0.04 | −0.12, 0.21 | 0.59 |
Percentage of institutional deliveries | −0.01 | −0.23, 0.20 | 0.917 | 0.07 | −0.08, 0.21 | 0.38 |
Percentage of women who reported 4 ANC visits during pregnancy | 0.00 | −0.06, 0.06 | 0.948 | −0.06 | −0.11, −0.01 | 0.01 |
Percentage of children who received full immunization | −0.05 | −0.27, 0.17 | 0.665 | −0.02 | −0.17, 0.13 | 0.79 |
District wealth decile | −2.18 | −4.73, 0.36 | 0.093 | −2.62 | −4.84, −0.40 | 0.02 |
Mean of dependent variable | 36.63 | 20.49 | ||||
Sample size | 1148 | 1128 |
Outcome for model 1: percentage of u5 children who are stunted in the overall sample (inclusive of rural and urban districts); Outcome for model 2: percentage of u5 children who are wasted in the overall sample (inclusive of rural and urban districts); Outcome for model 3: percentage of u5 children who are stunted in rural districts; Outcome for model 4: percentage of u5 children who are wasted in rural districts; Outcome for model 5: percentage of u5 children who are stunted in urban districts; and Outcome for model 6: percentage of u5 children who are wasted in urban districts. All outcomes predicted as a function of SBM status (post-SBM) and percentage of households with personal toilets per district in India. District fixed effects and state-specific linear time trend covariates not shown. ANC, antenatal care; SBM, Swachh Bharat Mission; u5, under 5 y old.