Skip to main content

Table 4 Logistic regression results for differences in current contraceptive use between migrants and non-migrants, PMA2020 Project, Kinshasa 2013

From: The fertility of internal migrants to Kinshasa

  Using any method of contraception Modern contraception Traditional contraception
  Odds SE Odds SE Odds SE
Migrant 0.95 0.13 0.70** 0.13 1.28* 0.20
Number of births 1.21*** 0.05 1.22*** 0.06 1.09** 0.05
Age 1.38*** 0.06 1.26*** 0.07 1.33*** 0.07
Age2 0.99*** 0.00 0.99*** 0.00 0.99*** 0.00
Level of education       
 No education (ref.) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
 Primary school 0.97 0.23 1.11 0.34 0.88 0.23
 Middle secondary 1.30 0.31 1.91** 0.60 0.83 0.23
 Advanced secondary + 2.13** 0.63 2.56** 0.94 1.24 0.42
Marital status       
 Married/in union (ref.) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
 Separated/divorced/widowed 0.22*** 0.08 0.30** 0.16 0.27*** 0.13
 Never married 0.98 0.13 0.99 0.17 0.98 0.16
Household wealth       
 Quintile 1 (lowest, ref.) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
 Quintile 2 1.13 0.19 0.84 0.18 1.37 0.28
 Quintile 3 1.40** 0.23 0.88 0.18 1.82*** 0.37
 Quintile 4 1.23 0.21 1.05 0.22 1.29 0.28
 Quintile 5 (highest) 1.51** 0.27 1.26 0.27 1.41 0.31
N= 2010 2010 2010
  1. Notes: *p ≤ 0.10; **p ≤ 0.05; ***p ≤ 0.01. We remove all pregnant women from this analysis (n = 187, 160 non-migrants and 27 migrants)