Skip to main content

Table 3 Unadjusted (bivariate) and adjusted (multivariate) logistic regression analysis of correlates of childbearing-related decisions and behaviors

From: Reproductive intentions and corresponding use of safer conception methods and contraception among Ugandan HIV clients in serodiscordant relationships

  Full sample (N = 389) Both members of couple want child now (N = 313) Tried to conceive in the past 6 months (N = 118) Did not try to conceive in the past 6 months (N = 268)
Both members of couple want child now Tried to conceive in the past 6 months Used SCM during attempts to conceive Current use of modern contraceptives Use of contraception or behaviors consistent with pregnancy prevention
UOR (CI) AOR (CI)a UOR (CI) AOR (CI)b UOR (CI) AOR (CI) UOR (CI) AOR (CI) UOR (CI)
Sociodemographic characteristics
 Age 1.02 (.99, 1.05) 0.95*** (.92, .98) 1.03 (.98, 1.07) 0.98 (.91, 1.06) 0.97 (.94, 1.001) 1.02 (.99, 1.05)
 Female gender 1.13 (.69, 1.87) 4.16*** (2.54, 6.83) 2.54** (1.28, 5.06) 0.47 (.15, 1.47) 1.64 (.94, 2.85) 0.96 (.59, 1.57)
 Some secondary education 0.43** (.26, .72) 0.61 (.31, 1.23) 0.66 (.39, 1.10) 1.76 (.54, 5.73) 0.94 (.53, 1.66) 1.12 (.68, 1.85)
HIV disease characteristics
vTime since HIV diagnosis 1.01*** (1.00, 1.01) 1.00 (1.00, 1.01) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.00 (1.00, 1.01) 1.00 (1.00, 1.01) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
 Currently on ART 2.07 (.18, 23.09) 1.00c 0.13 (.01, 2.14) 1.00c 1.00c
 CD4 countd 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.002** (1.001,1.003) h 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)   1.002* (1.000, 1.003) f 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
 Undetectable HIV viral loade 3.52 (1.81, 6.83) g 1.08 (.50, 2.36)   0.56 (.10, 2.98)   1.04 (.47, 2.29)   1.57 (.79, 3.12)
 Time on ART 1.01*** (1.01, 1.01) 1.00 (.99, 1.00) 1.00 (.99, 1.01) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00) 1.00 (1.00, 1.00)
Partner and relationship characteristics
 Married to partner 3.55*** (1.97, 6.38) 4.96*** (1.75, 14.04) 1.35 (.65, 2.78) 1.00c 0.63 (.33, 1.22) 1.02 (.55, 1.88)
 Length of relationship 1.06** (1.02, 1.09) 1.08* (1.02, 1.15) 0.94*** (.91, .96) 0.99 (.96, 1.03) 1.03 (.97, 1.08) 0.96* (.93, .99) 0.96* (.93, .99) 1.00 (.98, 1.02)
 Currently living with partner 2.93** (1.51, 5.70) 1.02 (.36, 2.93) 1.30 (.57, 2.97) 1.00c 1.05 (.47, 2.35) 0.99 (.49, 2.00)
 Participant has biological children 0.31 (.09, 1.02) 0.33*** (.16, .68) 0.46 (.19, 1.11) 0.52 (.15, 1.86) 2.54 (.56, 11.45) 4.00* (1.26, 12.74)
 Partner has biological children 1.06 (.64, 1.75) 2.77*** (1.72, 4.46) 1.61 (.90, 2.89) 0.65 (.21, 2.01) 1.45 (.83, 2.51) 1.14 (.70, 1.84)
 Has had a child with partner 0.33*** (.19, .58) 0.09*** (.04, .21) 0.19*** (.11, .31) 0.33** (.16, .67) 0.96 (.25, 3.73) 1.38 (.77, 2.46) 1.49 (.91, 2.46)
 Self-agency in decision making 2.02* (1.13, 3.64) 1.58 (.74, 3.38) 0.19*** (.10, .35) 0.39* (.19, .81) 6.34*** (1.64, 24.50) 5.80* (1.27, 26.50) 0.37** (.18, .73) 0.34** (.16, .74) 0.69 (.38, 1.24)
 Reproductive coercion 0.95 (.63, 1.41) 1.32 (.87, 1.99) 1.00c 1.41 (.91, 2.19) 1.31 (.79, 2.16)
 Discussed childbearing with provider 1.10 (.44, 2.77) 2.07 (.92, 4.65) 5.86*** (1.62, 21.29) 5.29 (.95, 29.42) 0.65 (.18, 2.35) 1.85 (.62, 5.47)
Psychosocial functioning
 Depression 0.97 (.92, 1.02) 1.11*** (1.05, 1.17) 1.04 (.97, 1.11) 1.02 (.91, 1.15) 0.95 (.88, 1.01) 0.98 (.93, 1.03)
 Possibly clinically depressed 0.73 (.37, 1.44) 2.15* (1.11, 4.16) 1.91 (.54, 6.78) 0.27* (.08, .91) 0.20* (.06, .72) 0.79 (.38, 1.65)
 Likely clinically depressed 0.35 (.12, 1.00) 3.46 (.85, 14.11) 1.00c 1.00c 0.39 (.10, 1.61)
 Internalized HIV stigma 0.57*** (.43, .75) 0.83 (.54, 1.29) 1.21 (.94, 1.56) 1.04 (.56, 1.90) 1.13 (.83, 1.53) 0.98 (.75, 1.28)
eIMB information
 SCM knowledge 1.21*** (1.11, 1.32) 1.18* (1.04, 1.33) 0.91* (.84, .99) 0.96 (.87, 1.06) 1.03 (.84, 1.27) 1.04 (.95, 1.15) 1.01 (.93, 1.09)
eIMB motivation
 SCM motivation 2.62 (.49, 14.19)
 Positive attitudes towards contraception 1.20 (.65, 2.22) 0.53* (.31, .92) 0.63 (.32, 1.25) 2.13* (1.09, 4.19) 3.17** (1.47, 6.83) 1.08 (.61, 1.91)
eIMB behavioral skills
 SCM self-efficacy 7.42* (1.30, 42.24) 5.16 (.91, 29.27)
eIMB social/ecological
 Community childbearing stigma 1.37*** (1.15, 1.63) 1.40* (1.05, 1.76) 0.98 (.84, 1.13) 0.72 (.49, 1.06) 0.96 (.80, 1.16) 0.97 (.83, 1.14)
 Provider childbearing stigma 0.96 (.72, 1.28) 1.18 (.92, 1.52) 1.30 (.70, 2.42) 0.76 (.54, 1.07) 0.96 (.73, 1.26)
 Internalized childbearing stigma 0.61** (.43, .87) 0.44** (.28, .71) 0.72 (.42, 1.22) 1.00c 0.93 (.61, 1.41) 1.41 (.93, 2.12)
 SCM cultural acceptability 0.51** (.32, .80) 0.65 (.34, 1.25) 1.74** (1.17, 2.59) 1.92* (1.19, 3.08) 1.72 (.60, 4.93) 1.29 (.81, 2.06) 1.41 (.93, 2.13)
FP/SCC services
 Had any consults with provider about decision to have another child 1.04 (.44, 2.48) 1.90 (.88, 4.10) 0.70 (.23, 2.18) 2.59 (.92, 7.35)
 Had any consults with provider about safer conception methods 1.57 (.45, 5.46) 1.93 (.76, 4.90) 6.53*** (1.58, 27.10) 1.05 (.23, 4.85)
 Had any consults with provider about contraception 1.10 (.44, 2.77) 1.05 (.46, 2.39) 0.28 (.06, 1.25) 1.69 (.66, 4.32)
  1. *** p < .001 ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05
  2. aThis multiple regression model did not include time on ART because it was highly correlated (r = .84) with time since HIV diagnosis
  3. bThis multiple regression model included depressive symptomatology, but not the likely presence of a depressive disorder due to the lack of independence between these two variables
  4. cA standard error and confidence interval could not be computed because one or both groups had all participants with the same response value
  5. dCD4 count data were available for 252 participants at baseline
  6. eHIV viral load data were available for 315 participants at study baseline
  7. fCD4 count was not included in this reported multiple regression model because only 167 of 268 participants had CD4 data
  8. gViral load was not included in the multiple regression model presented in this table because of the high number of cases with missing data; when viral load was added to the multiple regression model, it was not significantly correlated with the dependent variable when adjusting for the other variables that were significant bivariate correlates
  9. hCD4 count was not included in the multiple regression model presented in this table because of the high number of cases with missing data; when CD4 count was added to the multiple regression model, it remained significantly correlated with the dependent variable when adjusting for the other variables that were significant bivariate correlates