Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 4 Socio-economic status (SES) and rural/urban differences in ranking of preferences for treating malaria

From: Do consumers' preferences for improved provision of malaria treatment services differ by their socio-economic status and geographic location? A study in southeast Nigeria

  CHW PHC centre Public Hospital Train mothers Patent medicine dealer Herbalists Private hospital
  n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%) n (%)
SES        
Q1 most poor 66(10.8) 107(17.4) 196(31.9) 123(20.0) 17(2.8) 41(6.7) 62(10.1)
Q2 very poor 78(12.7) 99(16.1) 167(27.2) 141(22.9) 40(6.5) 33(5.4) 57(9.3)
Q3 poor 82(13.3) 120(19.5) 153(24.8) 119(19.3) 31(5.0) 26(4.2) 81(13.2)
Q4 least poor 79(13.0) 123(20.2) 225(37.0) 90 (14.8) 15(2.5) 20(3.3) 55(9.1)
Equity (Q1:Q4) ratio 0.83 0.86 0.86 1.35 1.12 2.03 1.11
Chi-square(p-value 2.3(.52) 4.4 (.22) 25.3(<.01) 13.3(.004) 16.8(.001) 8.4(.038) 7.1(.07)
R/U        
Rural 142(11.5) 207(16.8) 399(32.4) 232(18.9) 549(4.4) 77(6.3) 115(9.4)
Urban 165(13.2) 244(19.5) 362(28.9) 242(19.3) 50 (4.0) 44(3.5) 140(11.2)
Equity (R:U) ratio 0.87 0.86 1.12 0.98 1.10 1.80 1.84
Chi-square (p-value 1.6 (.21) 3.0(.086) 3.6 (.059) .09(.76) .24(.63) 10.0(.002) 2.3(.13)