Skip to main content

Table 5 Survey-specific adjusted association between anaemia and environmental factors among children 6–59 months in Ethiopia (EDHS-2005, n = 4,259; EDHS-2011, n = 9,259; EDHS-2016, n = 8,399)

From: Household environment associated with anaemia among children aged 6–59 months in Ethiopia: a multilevel analysis of Ethiopia demographic and health survey (2005–2016)

Variables

EDHS-2005

EDHS-2011

EDHS-2016

Model 1

Model 5

Model 1

Model 5

Model 1

Model 2#

AOR(95%CI)

AOR (95%)

AOR(95%CI)

AOR (95%)

AOR(95%CI)

AOR (95%)

Environmental factors

Sanitation facility

 Improved

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

 Unimproved

1.18 (0.88–1.57)

0.97 (0.71–1.34)

1.08 (0.92–1.28)

1.02 (0.85–1.21)

0.88 (0.73–1.07)

0.89 (0.69–1.14)

 Open defecation

1.26 (0.95–1.66)**

0.93 (0.67–1.28)

1.49 (1.28–1.76)**

1.33 (1.12–1.58)*

1.29 (1.06–1.57)*

1.49 (1.13–1.90)*

Source of drinking water

 Improved

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

 

 Unimproved

0.90 (0.75–1.07)

0.87 (0.72–1.05)

1.17 (1.04–1.32)*

1.11 (0.97–1.26)

1.02 (0.89–1.17)

 

Time to get a water source

 On-premise

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

Ref

 

  ≤ 30 min

1.56 (1.13–2.16)

1.32 (0.91–1.93)

0.99 (0.81–1.23)

0.93 (0.74–1.17)

1.02 (0.83–1.27)

 

 31–60 min

1.63 (1.14–2.32)

1.44 (0.96–2.17)

1.05 (0.84–1.32)

0.95 (0.74–1.22)

1.10 (0.87–1.39)

 

  > 60 min

1.81 (1.26–2.61)

1.49 (0.98–2.27)

1.29 (1.02–1.62)*

1.11 (0.85–1.43)

1.01 (0.78–1.29)

 

Housing status

 Built from finished materials

Ref

Ref

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Built from natural or unfinished materials

1.59 (0.94–2.69)

1.37 (0.77–2.45)

1.28 (0.97–1.68)

 

0.96 (0.74–1.25)

 

Type of cooking fuel

 Clean fuels

Ref

 

Ref

 

Ref

Ref

 Solid fuels

1.81 (0.61–5.35)

 

1.29 (0.71–2.36)

 

1.62 (1.21–2.18)*

1.44 (0.99–2.11)

  1. AOR Adjusted odds ratio
  2. ** p < 0.001
  3. *p < 0.05; Model 1: Environmental factors (from model 0 with p < 0.25); Model 5: Environmental factors (from model 4 with p < 0.25) + Child related factors (from model 4 with p < 0.25) + Maternal factors (from model 4 with p < 0.25) + Household factors (from model 4 with p < 0.25) + Community level factors (from model 0 with p < 0.25); # Model 2 was selected after comparing the log-likelihood values of competing models (see supplementary Table 4)