Skip to main content

Table 4 Abortion rates (per 1000) and mean abortion/birth ratios (per 100) among 20–44-year-old women in 1998 in the three groups of municipalities, formed by the rate of private gynaecologist visits in 1999 (A), and in the three groups formed by the rate of private gynaecologist visits in groups at 5-year age intervals in 1999 (B) 1).

From: Use of private gynaecologist does not relate to better prevention outcomes – An ecological analysis from Finland

A

Low

Middle

High

 

< 24.2%

24.2–33.3%

> 33.3%

(Number of women)

(300278)

(291580)

(278044)

Raw abortion rate

8.1

10.2***

11.4***

Rate difference (95% CI)

 

2.14 (1.65–2.63)

3.32 (2.81–3.83)

Age-adjusted rate2)

8.4

10.2

11.1

Rate difference (95% CI)

 

1.80 (1.51–2.09)

2.72 (2.43–3.01)

Age and social class adjusted rate 2)

8.2

10.9

11.0

Rate difference (95% CI)

 

2.66 (2.37–2.95)

2.76 (2.47–3.05)

(Number of births)

(19710)

(18623)

(16496)

Age-adjusted abortion-birth ratio

12.1

16.0

19.4

Ratio difference (95% CI)

 

3.85 (3.45–4.26)

7.30 (6.88–7.72)

B

   
 

< 11%

11–22%

> 22%

(Number of women)

(153064)

(265114)

(450412)

Raw abortion rate

10.6

10.8

9.0

Age-adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) 3)

1.00

1.16 (1.09–1.23)

1.34 (1.25–1.43)

Age- and social-class-adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) 3)

1.00

1.11 (1.04–1.19)

1.23 (1.14–1.33)

(Number of births)

(11715)

(16989)

(26035)

Abortion-birth ratio

13.8

16.8

15.6

Age-adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) 3)

1.00

1.35 (1.25–1.46)

1.59 (1.47–1.73)

Age- and social-class-adjusted rate ratios (95% CI) 3)

1.00

1.25 (1.16–1.35)

1.40 (1.28–1.53)

  1. 1)The age groups with similar visit rates were pooled over the municipalities into three groups, see Methods. The lowest use group is the reference group.
  2. 2) Calculated by using the age-distribution and social class of all municipalities as the reference.
  3. 3) Calculated by Poisson regression, the reference group is "Low".