Skip to main content

Table 3 Correlates of caregiver under- and over-estimation using the whole sample, Madagascar, 2016, N = 3361

From: Caregiver perceptions of child development in rural Madagascar: a cross-sectional study

  Model (1) Model (2)
Under-estimation Over-estimation Under-estimation Over-estimation
  OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI) OR (95% CI)
Child Characteristics
 Age (months) 0.95** (0.92–0.98) 1.01 (1.00–1.03) 0.95** (0.92–0.98) 1.01 (0.99–1.03)
 Gender 0.87 (0.67–1.11) 1.00 (0.88–1.13) 0.87 (0.67–1.12) 0.98 (0.86–1.11)
 Birth Order 0.99 (0.86–1.14) 1.01 (0.94–1.09) 0.99 (0.86–1.14) 1.01 (0.94–1.09)
 HAZ 1.09 (0.96–1.25) 0.82** (0.75–0.88)
 WAZ 1.13 (0.98–1.31) 0.85** (0.79–0.92)
Caregiver Characteristics
Age (years) 0.99 (0.97–1.02) 1.00 (0.99–1.02) 0.99 (0.97–1.02) 1.00 (0.99–1.01)
Education
 No school [ref] 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Primary or less 1.04 (0.73–1.48) 0.80* (0.65–0.98) 1.03 (0.72–1.47) 0.80* (0.65–0.99)
 Secondary or Higher 1.15 (0.72–1.84) 0.64** (0.49–0.84) 1.13 (0.70–1.82) 0.65** (0.49–0.85)
 Depression Score 1.12 (0.95–1.31) 1.05 (0.96–1.15) 1.11 (0.95–1.31) 1.05 (0.96–1.15)
Belief of influence on child intelligence
 None [ref] 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Some 0.72 (0.49–1.06) 0.81 (0.63–1.05) 0.72 (0.49–1.06) 0.81 (0.63–1.06)
 A lot 0.71 (0.49–1.03) 0.72** (0.58–0.91) 0.70 (0.49–1.02) 0.73** (0.58–0.91)
Household Characteristics
 Household Size 1.01 (0.95–1.07) 1.00 (0.97–1.03) 1.01 (0.95–1.07) 1.00 (0.97–1.03)
 Family Care Indicator Score 0.96 (0.77–1.20) 1.04 (0.88–1.23) 0.97 (0.78–1.20) 1.03 (0.88–1.22)
Wealth Quintiles
 Q1 (lowest) [ref] 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
 Q2 0.88 (0.60–1.31) 1.16 (0.88–1.52) 0.87 (0.59–1.29) 1.18 (0.90–1.54)
 Q3 0.80 (0.53–1.21) 1.17 (0.87–1.58) 0.80 (0.53–1.20) 1.18 (0.87–1.59)
 Q4 0.72 (0.47–1.11) 0.86 (0.65–1.15) 0.71 (0.46–1.10) 0.87 (0.66–1.16)
 Q5 (highest) 0.53* (0.31–0.88) 0.73 (0.53–1.02) 0.51* (0.31–0.86) 0.74 (0.53–1.03)
  1. Multinomial logistic regression with matched caregiver-perceived child intelligence and ASQ-I ranking as the reference outcome category. All estimations adjusted for treatment arm and region, and corrected for clustering at the village level. Model (1) included height-for-age z-score while Model (2) included weight-for-age z-score.
  2. ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05