Table 2.
Effects of a Cash Plus Intervention on Primary and Exploratory (Mediating) Outcomes Among Adolescents at Study Midline and Endline, by Intervention Group, Tanzania, 2018–2019
|
Intervention Group
(n = 941) |
Control Group
(n = 992) |
Risk Difference b | 95% CI c | Odds Ratio b | 95% CI c | P Value | ICC | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome a | No. | % | No. | % | ||||||
| Midline | ||||||||||
| Primary outcomes | ||||||||||
| Depression scale score (range, 1–30)d | 6.88 (4.02) | 6.67 (4.08) | 0.15 | −0.30, 0.60 | 0.506 | 0.03 | ||||
| Depressive symptomatology (yes) | 232 | 25 | 252 | 25 | 0.93 | 0.70, 1.23 | 0.617 | 0.06 | ||
| Exploratory outcomes | ||||||||||
| Education/employment status | ||||||||||
| Attending school/in training | 410 | 44 | 446 | 45 | 0.87 | 0.66, 1.14 | 0.304 | 0.03 | ||
| Engaged in paid work | 96 | 10 | 100 | 10 | 1.07 | 0.70, 1.61 | 0.764 | 0.12 | ||
| In both school/training and paid work | 42 | 4 | 41 | 4 | 1.14 | 0.69, 1.89 | 0.613 | 0.10 | ||
| Not in employment, education, or training | 393 | 42 | 405 | 41 | 1.00 | 0.80, 1.26 | 0.975 | 0.02 | ||
| Having a romantic partner (yes) | 305 | 32 | 350 | 35 | 0.94 | 0.72, 1.23 | 0.658 | 0.05 | ||
| Self-esteem score (range, 1–5)d,g | 3.77 (0.78) | 3.76 (0.78) | 0.00 | −0.10, 0.09 | 0.922 | 0.04 | ||||
| Quality of life score (range, 1–10)d,h | 5.26 (2.67) | 5.12 (2.56) | 0.06 | −0.30, 0.43 | 0.742 | 0.09 | ||||
| Locus of control score (range, 1–5)d,i | 3.30 (0.44) | 3.29 (0.44) | 0.01 | −0.03, 0.05 | 0.469 | 0.00 | ||||
| Endline | ||||||||||
| Primary outcomes | ||||||||||
| Depression scale score (range, 1–30)d | 5.62 (4.33) | 6.03 (4.78) | −0.36 | −0.84, 0.11 | 0.134 | 0.02 | ||||
| Depressive symptomatology (yes) | 182 | 19 | 262 | 26 | 0.67 | 0.52, 0.86 | 0.001 | 0.02 | ||
| Exploratory outcomes | ||||||||||
| Education/employment status | ||||||||||
| Attending school/intraining | 295 | 31 | 328 | 33 | 0.88 | 0.67, 1.14 | 0.326 | 0.02 | ||
| Engaged in paid work | 219 | 23 | 203 | 20 | 1.28 | 1.00, 1.64 | 0.049 | 0.01 | ||
| In school/training and paid work | 21 | 2 | 44 | 4 | 0.46 | 0.24, 0.87 | 0.017 | 0.18 | ||
| Not in employment, education, or training | 406 | 43 | 417 | 42 | 1.02 | 0.82, 1.28 | 0.854 | 0.02 | ||
| Having a romantic partner (yes) | 391 | 42 | 409 | 41 | 1.09 | 0.87, 1.36 | 0.452 | 0.02 | ||
| Self-esteem score (range, 1–5)d,g | 3.86 (0.80) | 3.76 (0.81) | 0.10 | 0.03, 0.18 | 0.007 | 0.01 | ||||
| Quality of life score (range, 1–10)d,h | 4.85 (2.12) | 4.80 (1.99) | 0.03 | −0.20, 0.26 | 0.801 | 0.03 | ||||
| Locus of control score (range, 1–5)d,i | 3.29 (0.46) | 3.28 (0.47) | 0.01 | −0.03, 0.05 | 0.549 | 0.00 | ||||
Abbreviations: CES-D-10, 10-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; CI, confidence interval; ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient.
a Primary outcomes were measured using the CES-D-10, as well as a binary measurement (CES-D-10 score ≥10 points) that indicated depressive symptomatology.
b Adjusted for sex, age (years), the corresponding outcome at baseline, and district/community size fixed effects (the strata). Multilevel methodology was used to account for clustering of outcomes within and between villages.
c Robust 95% CIs.
d Values are expressed as mean (standard deviation).
e Depressive symptoms were measured using the CES-D-10 scale.
f Depressive symptomatology was defined as a score of ≥10 points on the CES-D-10 scale.
g Self-esteem score was the average of 2 Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale (26) items.
h Quality of life was measured using a 10-point Cantril’s Ladder of Life Scale (27).
i Locus of control score was the average of 5 Levenson’s Multidimensional Locus of Control Scale (28) items.