Skip to main content

Table 3 Socio-economic factors and the risk of malaria infection by logistic regression model. Health facility-based surveys.

From: Rapid urban malaria appraisal (RUMA) I: Epidemiology of urban malaria in Ouagadougou

Socio-economic factors % OR 95% CI P value
Adjusted for the effects of residential areas and age groups
Education
Primary 23.2% 1 - -
Secondary 33.4% 0.97 0.62–1.49 0.873
Superior 5.2% 0.96 0.44–2.09 0.911
No education 35.5% 1.3 0.85–1.98 0.222
Religious 2.6% 0.74 0.24–2.27 0.594
Housing material
Concrete/brick 58.1% 1 - -
Leaf/mud 4.6% 1.61 0.82–3.19 0.17
Leaf 0.8% 2.13 0.50–9.00 0.304
Others 36.5% 1.45 1.06–1.98 < 0.05
Water supply resource
Tap water 38.1% 1 - -
Well 0.6% 1.58 0.18–13.90 0.68
Fountain 58.1% 1.66 1.19–2.31 < 0.005
Others 3.2% 2.8 1.30–6.04 < 0.005
Living near a garden or agriculture land
No 71.0% 1 - -
Yes 29.0% 1.39 1.01–1.92 < 0.05
Adjusted for the effects of different residential areas
Bednet usage
No use 58.0% 1 - -
Used 42.0% 0.74 0.54–1.00 < 0.05
Without adjusting for residential areas and age groups
Rural exposure within 90 days
No 91.3% 1 - -
Yes 8.7% 1.14 0.70–1.90 0.6
Previous malaria treatment within 30 days with the presence of parasitaemia
No 52.5% 1 - -
Yes 47.5% 1.1 0.82–1.48 0.5
\