Sex education and self-poisoning in Sri Lanka: an explorative analysis

BMC Public Health

Table 4 Multivariable logistic regression models for associations between sex education and self-poisoning, stratified by sex

	Model 1			Model 2			Model 3
	Female	Male	p	Female	Male	p	Female	Male	p
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	p	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	p	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	p
Receipt of sex education
Yes	1.00	1.00	0.06	1.00	1.00	0.05	1.00	1.00	0.06
No	1.12 (0.61-2.03)	2.58 (1.40-4.73)	0.06	0.94 (0.51-1.75)	2.25 (1.21-4.17)	0.05	1.15 (0.63-2.12)	2.58 (1.40-4.74)	0.06
Quality of sex education received through school
Good quality	1.00	1.00	0.15	1.00	1.00	0.13	1.00	1.00	0.16
Poor quality	0.83 (0.51-1.36)	0.68 (0.35-1.35)		0.81 (0.49-1.33)	0.71 (0.36-1.41)		0.81 (0.49-1.32)	0.68 (0.34-1.34)
No sex education	1.04 (0.56-1.94)	2.27 (1.19-4.33)		0.87 (0.45-1.66)	2.01 (1.05-3.88)		1.06 (0.56-1.99)	2.27 (1.19-4.33)
Usefulness of sex education
Useful	1.00	1.00	0.16	1.00	1.00	0.13	1.00	1.00	0.17
Not useful	1.96 (0.88-4.37)	2.13 (0.77-5.87)		2.03 (0.90-4.56)	2.71 (0.95-7.75)		1.83 (0.82-4.08)	2.10 (0.76-5.79)
No sex education	1.18 (0.65-2.16)	2.79 (1.50-5.18)		1.00 (0.54-1.86)	2.46 (1.31-4.63)		1.21 (0.66-2.22)	2.79 (1.50-5.18)

Hospital controls, complete case analysis (Total N=681; Females N=402, Males N=279)
Model 1: Adjusted for sex, age and religion
Model 2: Adjusted for sex, age, religion, highest educational attainment of either parent
Model 3: Adjusted for sex, age, religion, marital status
OR Odds Ratio (if the OR>1, this suggests that exposed individuals were more likely to have self-poisoned than non-exposed individuals)
CI Confidence Interval (if the CI overlaps 1, this suggests that there is no statistical evidence of a difference in risk between exposed and non-exposed individuals)
p values are presented for the test of interaction by sex

ISSN: 1471-2458