3. Methods: towards an email analysis to o l
3.9 Reliability and validity
Results in Table 4.1 above showed women age 15-19 years had the higher percentage by 20.1%, this follows 25-29 by 18.3%, age 20-24years by 17.3%, also age 30-34years had 14%, and the least were age group 35-39 years had 12.1%, follow by 40-44 years by 9.3% and age 45-49 years by 8.8%. Women reported to lived more in rural area by 57.9% than those living in urban area by 42.1%. Also, women reported to have no formal education by 37.8%, these were followed by women with secondary by 35.8%, primary education 17.3% and the least were those with higher education by 9.1%. Women reported in the survey, Hausa reported by 34%, Igbo by 14.5%, Yoruba by 14.1% and other ethnics by 37.4%. Furthermore, North-Central reported by 14.3%, North-East by 14.8%, North-West by 30.5%, South-East by 11.5%, South-South by 12.7% and South-West reported by 16.2%. More than half of women reported were Muslim reported by 52% and those reported to be practicing Christianity and traditional religion were 47% and 1%
respectively.
In addition women reported to be rich and in the middle wealth status reported by 43.4% and 19.2% than those that were reported to be poor by 37.4%. Women reported more to be employed by 63.2% than those that were not employed by 36.8%. According to the respondents’ decision on health care, wife alone reported by 6.2%, joint decision by 32.6%, husband alone by 60.9%
and others decision reported by 0.3%. Women age at given birth was reported to be early childbearing by 59.4%, middle childbearing by 40.3% and those reported to be late childbearing by 0.3%. Finally, for the antenatal care visit, those women that visited antenatal care reported by 66.1% while not visited antenatal care reported by 33.9%.
4.2.: Distribution of Respondents by Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Antenatal care utilization
Background Characteristics
Antenatal care visit
Significant Test
No Yes
Age 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49
8.8 21.0 25.2 18.4 13.9 8.6 3.9
5.3 19.0 26.9 21.9 16.1 7.9 2.9
χ2= 155.01 Pr =0.0000
Place of Resident Urban
Rural
11.3 88.7
47.9 52.1
χ2= 2622.47 Pr = 0.0000 Level of Education
No education Primary Secondary Higher
81.2 11.8 6.8 0.3
30.8 23.0 36.9 9.3
χ2= 4775.98 Pr = 0.0000 Ethnicity
Yoruba Hausa Igbo Others
0.9 68.2 1.5 29.5
18.2 28.9 15.5 37.4
χ2= 821.46 Pr = 0.0000
Region North-Central North-East North-West South-East South-South South-West
10.9 20.2 59.3 1.2 6.0 2.5
15.9 15.1 24.9 12.1 10.9 20.9
χ2= 3389.41 Pr = 0.0000
Religion Christian Islam Traditional
15.78 82.6 1.6
48.7 50.6 0.7
χ2= 2073.21 Pr = 0.0000 Wealth Index
Poor Middle Rich
78.4 14.3 7.3
28.4 21.8 49.8
χ2= 4871.28 Pr = 0.0000
Not employed Employed
39.2 60.8
24.8 75.2
χ2=443.08 Pr = 0.0000 Decision on antenatal Care
Wife Alone Both
Husband Alone Others
2.0 17.7 80.1 0.2
7.1 37.9 54.8 0.2
χ2=1196.04 Pr = 0.0000 Age at Birth
Early Childbearing Middle Childbearing Late childbearing
70.5 25.0 4.5
.5146 .4819 .0035
χ2=986.52 Pr = 0.0000
4.2.: Distribution of Respondents by Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Health Care Utilization.
There is significant association between socio-demographic characteristics and antenatal care utilization (P<0.05). There is strong significant association between age of women and antenatal care utilization (χ2 =155.01, P = 0.0000) whereby women age 25-29 years utilize antenatal care by 25.2%, 30-34 years by 18.4%, 20-24 years by 21%, 35-39 years by 16.1%, 40-44 years by 7.9%, 15-19 years by 8.8% and age 45-49 years by 2.9% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. Also, there is strong significant association between place of resident of women and antenatal care utilization (χ2 =2622.47, P =0.0000) and women in urban area showed to utilize antenatal care more by 47.9% than those in rural area by 52.1% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. There is strong significant association between women level of education and antenatal care utilization (χ2 =4775.98, P =0.0000), women with secondary education reported to utilize antenatal care by 6.8%%, those with no formal education reported by 81.2%, those with primary education by 11.8% and lastly were those with higher education by 0.3% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care.
More so, result showed that there is strong significant association between ethnicity and antenatal care utilization (χ2=821.46, P=0.0000), Hausa that utilize antenatal care reported by 68.2%, Yoruba by 0.9%, Igbo by 1,5% and other joint ethnic groups reported to utilize antenatal
care 29.5% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. There is strong significant association between region and antenatal care utilization ((χ2=3389.41, P=0.0000) Northern region (North-West were 59.3%, North-East were 20.2%, North-Central were 10.9%) utilize antenatal care more than those in the Southern region (South-West were 2.5%, South-South were 1.6%, South-East were 1.2%) compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care.
There is strong significant association between religion and antenatal care utilization (χ2=2073.21, P = 0.0000), women who were Christian utilize antenatal care reported by 15.78%, Muslim women by 82.6% and least were those practicing traditional religion reported by 1.6%
compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. There is strong significant association between wealth index and antenatal care (χ2=4871.28, P = 0.0000), women that were rich utilize antenatal care reported by 7.3%, those are poor by 78.4% and women within the middle wealth index by 14.3% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. There is no strong significant association between occupation and antenatal care utilization (χ2=443.08, P = 0.0000), employed women utilized antenatal care by 60.8% and those that were not employed reported by 39.2%
compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care .
There is strong significant association between decision on antenatal care and antenatal care utilization (χ2=1196.04, P = 0.0000), husband alone made decision on women antenatal care utilization by 80.1%, both made joint decision on women antenatal care by 17.7%, wife alone made decision alone on their antenatal care utilization by 2.0% and those that reported that others made decision on their antenatal care were 0.2% compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care. There is strong significant association between age at given birth and antenatal care utilization ((χ2=986.52, P = 0.0000), women reported to give birth by middle child age by 25.0%, early childbearing by 70.5% and those that give birth at late childbearing age were 4.5%
compare to those that did not utilize antenatal care.
.Table 4.3: Odds Ratio Based on Binary Logistic Regression Analysis of Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Antenatal Care Utilization.
Characteristics Model 1 Model 2
Odd Ratio (95%
conf.interval)
Odd Ratio (95%conf.interval)
Decision on Health Care
Wife Alone (RC) Both
Husband Alone Others
1.00 0.98 1.04 0.78
0.73-1.32 0.76-1.40 0.26-2.39 Age at Birth
Early Childbearing (RC) Middle Childbearing Late childbearing
1.00 1.14**
1.91
1.01-1.28 0.58-6.30 Age
15-19 (RC) 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49
1.00 0.98 0.97 0.99 1.03 0.95 1.01
0.82-1.17 0.81-1.17 0.82-1.19 0.84-1.26 0.75-1.19 0.77-1.31)
1.00 0.97 0.93 0.95 0.98 0.88 0.93
0.79-1.18 0.76-1.13 0.78-1.16 0.79-1.22 0.69-1.13 0.70-1.24 Place of Resident
Urban Rural
1.00
0.65*** 0.51-0.83
1.00
0.65** 0.51-0.84 Level of Education
No education (RC) Primary
Secondary Higher
1.00 2.56***
4.16***
13.36***
(2.20-2.99 3.45-5.01 7.75-23.02
1.00 2.64***
4.06***
15.36***
2.25-3.09 3.33-4.94 8.39-28.12 Ethnicity
Yoruba (RC) Hausa
Igbo Others
1.00 0.29***
0.94 0.36***
0.16-0.53 0.50-1.78 0.21-0.62
1.00 0.27***
0.95 0.33***
0.15-0.50 0.50-1.79 0.19-0.58 Region
North-Central (RC) 1.00 1.00
North-West South-East South-South South-West
0.72 1.17 0.42***
1.43
0.50-1.05 0.70-1.97 0.29-0.59 0.78-2.61
0.70 1.11 0.38***
1.35
0.48-1.02 0.66-1.86 0.26-0.53 0.73-2.52
Religion
Christian (RC) Islam
Traditional
1.00 0.99 0.44***
0.75-1.33 0.28-0.69
1.00 0.97 0.45**
(0.72-1.31 0.28-0.70 Wealth Index
Poor (RC) Middle Rich
1.00 2.47***
4.68***
2.09-2.91 3.71-5.92
1.00 2.50***
4.69***
2.11-2.97 3.67-5.99 Occupation
Not employed (RC) Employed
1.00
1.47*** 1.30-1.66
1.00 1.49***
1.00 1.32-1.70 RC means the reference categories *P<0.05 **p<0.01 ***p<0.001
4.3: Odds Ratio Based on Binary Logistic Regression Analysis of Socio-Demographic Characteristics and Antenatal Care Utilization.
Table 4.3 above showed the result of logistic regression of the effect of socio-demographic factors on antenatal care utilization. Result from Model 1, reveals that rural women were 65 percent significantly less likely to utilize antenatal care than women who lived in urban RC (OR=0.65, P<0.001). Taking no formal education as the reference category, Women with secondary education were four times more likely to utilize antenatal health care than women with no formal education (RC). Women with higher education were 13 times more likely to utilize antenatal health care than women with no formal education (RC). Women with primary education were two and half times more likely than women with no formal education. Hausa women were significantly 29 percent less likely and others ethnic group were 36% significantly to utilize antenatal health care compare to Yoruba women (RC). Women in north-east were 1.32
times more likely to utilize health care than women in north-central (RC). Women in South-South were significantly 42% less likely to utilize health care than women in north-central (RC).
The traditional women were significantly 44 percent less likely to utilize antenatal health compare to Christian women RC (OR=0.44, P<0.001). Women in the middle wealth status were 2.47 times more likely to utilize antenatal care to women in the poor wealth index (RC). Women that were rich were 4.68 times more likely to utilize antenatal care to women in the poor wealth index (RC). Employed women were 47 percent more likely to utilize antenatal care than women who are not employed (RC).
Result from Model 2, reveals that Women that give birth at the middle childbearing ages were 14% more likely to utilize antenatal care to those who give birth at the early childbearing age (RC). Also women in rural area were significantly 65 percent less likely to utilize antenatal care to women in the urban area (RC).
The result showed that women with primary education were 2.56 times more likely to utilize antenatal care than women with no formal education (RC). Women with secondary education were significantly 4.16 times more likely to utilize health care than women with no formal education (RC). Women with higher education were significantly13.36 times more likely to utilize health care than women with no formal education (RC).
Hausa women were significantly 27 percent less likely to utilize antenatal care compare to Yoruba women (RC). Women in South-South were significantly 42% less likely to utilize antenatal care to women in North-Central (RC).
Women in the middle wealth status were 2.50 times more likely to utilize antenatal care to women in the poor wealth index (RC). Women that were rich were 4.69 times more likely to
utilize antenatal care to women in the poor wealth index (RC). Employed women were 49 percent more likely to utilize antenatal care than women who were not employed (RC).