Skip to main content

Table 3 Binomial logistic regressiona for factors associated with non-utilization of ‘Chiranjeevi Yojana (CY)’ b among eligible womenc in three districtsd of Gujarat, India (Jan-July 2013) (N=1707)e

From: Utilization of the state led public private partnership program “Chiranjeevi Yojana” to promote facility births in Gujarat, India: a cross sectional community based study

Variablef

 

Crude OR (95 % CI)

Adjusted OR (95 % CI) g

Socio-demographic characteristics

   

 Eligibility criteria h

   
 

BPL or ST

3.4 (2.7, 4.3)

3.1 (2.4, 3.8)

 

BPL and ST

Reference

Reference

 Age

   
 

18–25

Reference

Reference

 

>25

1.0 (0.8, 1.2)

0.98 (0.8, 1.2)

 Education

   
 

No Education

2.0 (1.5, 2.8)

1.6 (1.1, 2.2)

 

Pri. Education

1.7 (1,1, 2.7)

1.2 (0.8, 1.9)

 

Sec. Education

1.1 (0.8, 1.5)

1.0 (0.7, 1.4)

 

≥ Higher Sec.

Reference

Reference

 Standard of living index

   
 

1st quintile

Reference

-

 

2nd quintile

1.2 (0.8, 1.6)

-

 

3rd quintile

1.2 (0.9, 1.6)

-

 

4th quintile

1.5 (1.1, 2.0)

-

 

5th quintile

1.5 (1.1, 2.0)

-

Pregnancy related characteristics

   

 Parity

   
 

Primipara

Reference

-

 

Multipara

1.2 (0.99, 1.5)

-

 Antenatal visits

   
 

No

1.3 (0.9, 1.9)

-

 

<3 visits

1.3 (1.02, 1.8)

-

 

≥ 3 visits

Reference

-

 Antenatal complication

   
 

No

Reference

-

 

Yes

1.8 (1.1, 2.9)

-

Delivery type

   
 

Vaginal

Reference

Reference

 

C-Section

2.3 (1.3, 4.1)

2.1 (1.2, 3.8)

  1. aForward LR method with CY non-utilization as outcome; bdemand side financing scheme to increase institutional delivery among socially disadvantaged population; cwomen belonging to socially disadvantaged population; dDahod, Sabarkantha, Surendranagar; eWomen who delivered in Government facility were excluded; fvariables with bivariate p<0.2 shown in table, gStandard of living, parity, ANC visits and ANC complications had high collinearity with delivery type and were therefore not included in the model, hsociallydisadvantaged groups which includes both schedule tribes and below poverty line
  2. Model chi square: 134.6, df: 12, p<0.001; Pseudo Rsquare: 0.06; Hosmer and Lemeshow Chi square: 8.15, df: 8, p=0.419
  3. OR mentioned as bold are significant values in the model