Table 2 Multilevel logistic analysis of factors associated with total unmet need among sexually active women
From: Multilevel analysis of factors associated with unmet need for family planning among Malawian women
Variable | Null model | Model I aOR (95% CI) | Model II aOR (95% CI) | Model III aOR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Individual-level factors | ||||
 Woman’s age (years) | ||||
  15–24 |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  25–34 |  | 0.98 (0.87–1.10) |  | 0.98 (0.87–1.10) |
   ≥ 35 |  | 1.17 (1.03–1.33) |  | 1.19 (1.04–1.35) |
 Number of children ever had | ||||
  0 |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  1 |  | 0.61 (0.37–1.01) |  | 0.60 (0.36–1.00) |
  2+ |  | 0.62 (0.37–1.04) |  | 0.61 (0.36–1.03) |
 Wealth | ||||
  Poor |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Middle |  | 0.94 (0.84–1.05) |  | 0.95 (0.85–1.06) |
  Rich |  | 0.94 (0.84–1.05) |  | 0.99 (0.88–1.11) |
 Marital status | ||||
  Unmarried |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Married |  | 0.42 (0.35–0.49) |  | 0.41 (0.35–0.48) |
 Employed | ||||
  No |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Yes |  | 0.76 (0.69–0.82) |  | 0.78 (0.71–0.85) |
 Residence | ||||
  Urban |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Rural |  | 1.09 (0.96–1.25) |  | 0.91 (0.77–1.07) |
 Region | ||||
  Northern |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Central |  | 0.78 (0.69–0.89) |  | 0.69 (0.60–0.80) |
  Southern |  | 0.91 (0.81–1.03) |  | 0.80 (0.70–0.92) |
 Woman’s educational level | ||||
  No formal education |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Primary |  | 0.85 (0.75–0.96) |  | 0.90 (0.79–1.02) |
  Secondary and higher |  | 0.87 (0.74–1.02) |  | 0.94 (0.80–1.11) |
 Religion | ||||
  Catholics |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Protestants |  | 1.01 (0.89–1.14) |  | 1.00 (0.88–1.13) |
  Muslims and other |  | 1.14 (1.03–1.27) |  | 1.12 (1.01–1.25) |
 Experienced death of child | ||||
  No |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Yes |  | 0.90 (0.55–1.47) |  | 0.88 (0.54–1.44) |
 Media exposure | ||||
  No |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Yes |  | 0.82 (0.75–0.90) |  | 0.82 (0.75–0.90) |
 Distance to HF | ||||
  No problem |  | 1.00 |  | 1.00 |
  Problem |  | 1.09 (1.01–1.19) |  | 1.05 (0.96–1.15) |
Community-level factors | ||||
 Community wealth | ||||
  Low |  |  | 1.00 | 1.00 |
  Middle |  |  | 0.94 (0.84–1.05) | 0.90 (0.81–1.01) |
  High |  |  | 0.87 (0.76–1.01) | 0.81 (0.67–0.96) |
 Community employment | ||||
  Low |  |  | 1.00 | 1.00 |
  Middle |  |  | 0.87 (0.78–0.97) | 0.95 (0.85–1.06) |
  High |  |  | 0.76 (0.67–0.85) | 0.88 (0.78–0.99) |
 Community women’s education | ||||
  Low |  |  | 1.00 | 1.00 |
  Middle |  |  | 0.86 (0.77–0.98) | 0.86 (0.76–0.96) |
  High |  |  | 0.84 (0.74–0.95) | 0.81 (0.70–0.93) |
 Community distance to HF | ||||
  Low |  |  | 1.00 | 1.00 |
  Middle |  |  | 1.18 (1.04–1.33) | 1.17 (1.03–1.32) |
  High |  |  | 1.11 (0.97–1.27) | 1.08 (0.93–1.24) |
 Measures of variation | ||||
  Area variance (95% CI) | 0.14 (0.10–0.19) | 0.10 (0.06–0.15) | 0.11 (0.07–0.16) | 0.09 (0.05–0.14) |
  ICC (%) | 4.0 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 2.7 |
  PCV (%) | Ref. | 28.6 | 21.4 | 35.7 |
  MOR | 1.43 | 1.35 | 1.37 | 1.33 |
 Model Fit statistic | ||||
  AIC | 16,154.26 | 15,877.07 | 16,116.63 | 15,860.86 |