Skip to main content

Table 3 Logistic regression analyses for the associations between demographic variables and female genital mutilation/cutting

From: Health care-seeking patterns for female genital mutilation/cutting among young Somalis in Norway

Female genital mutilation/cutting
Demographic variables Univariate analysis (unadjusted) Model 1 (Adjusted) Model 2 (Adjusted)
   aAIC = 118.34 aAIC = 116.70
OR (95% CI) P -value OR (95% CI) P -value OR (95% CI) P -value
Age
 16 to 20 years 1   1   1  
 21 to 25 years 1.04 (0.53–2.06) 0.89 0.80 (0.23, 2.70) 0.71 1.20 (0.37, 3.84) 0.76
Age at migration to Norway
 0 to 11 years 1   1   1  
  ≥ 12 years 12.16 (4.99–29.62) <  0.01 4.78 (1.53, 15.00) 0.01 4.84 (1.57, 14.91) 0.01
Marital status
 Single 1   1   1  
 Married 1.07 (0.46–2.51) 0.86 0.86 (0.23, 3.21) 0.82 0.71 (0.20, 2.51) 0.60
 Divorce 0.92 (0.05–15.07) 0.95
Support of FGM/C practice
 No 1   1   1  
 Yes 5.15 (1.41–18.72) 0.01 2.06 (0.38, 11.10) 0.40 2.10 (0.39–11.43) 0.39
Education
 University 1   1   1  
 Secondary 1.51 (0.57–4.02) 0.40 1.44 (0.32, 6.42) 0.64 1.73 (0.40, 7.43) 0.46
 Primary 2.53 (0.86–7.48) 0.09 2.72 (0.48, 15.51) 0.26 3.06 (0.57, 16.38) 0.19
 No formal education 3.25 (0.48–21.9) 0.22 10.34 (0.17, 618.48) 0.26 10.19 (0.46, 227.76) 0.14
Place of birth of women
 Born out of Norway 1   1   1  
 Born in Norway 0.02 (0.01, 0.07) < 0.01 0.01 (0.001, 0.10) <  0.01 0.02 (0.005, 0.12) <  0.01
Stigmatized of FGM/C practice
 No 1   1    
 Yes 1.53 (0.69–3.38) 0.28 2.58 (0.59, 11.28) 0.21   
  1. Model 1 is a full adjustment for all main demographic variables
  2. Model 2 is based on variables that are statistically significant from the univariate analysis and variables that have been shown to be associated with FGM/C in the literature
  3. aModel selection was based on the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) which states that a model with a smaller AIC estimate fits the data better. Therefore, based on the AIC, model 2 was selected