Skip to main content

Table 3 Sources of nets used the previous night in Rufiji District during 2006 household survey by socioeconomic status

From: Markets, voucher subsidies and free nets combine to achieve high bed net coverage in rural Tanzania

Bed net source

Most poor

Very poor

Poor

Less poor

Least poor

Concentration Index

N (6323 overall)a

985

1249

1398

1357

1334

 

Proportion use (% (95% CI))

No net

66.8 (63.8, 69.7)

42.5 (39.8, 45.3)

36.6 (34.1, 39.2)

30.1 (27.8, 32.6)

19.0 (17.0, 21.2)

-0.214 (-0.335, -0.093)

Voucher

5.8 (4.5, 7.4)

8.3 (6.9, 10.0)

9.4 (8.0, 11.0)

10.6 (9.1, 12.4)

8.9 (7.4, 10.5)

0.067 (-0.027, 0.161)

Free-Vaccine

11.2 (9.3, 13.3)

19.6 (17.5, 21.9)

20.7(18.7, 23.0)

20.2 (18.1, 22.4)

14.4 (12.6, 16.4)

0.015 (-0.129, 0.159)

Free-Other

6.2 (4.8, 7.9)

8.6 (7.1, 10.3)

8.1 (6.8, 9.6)

7.1 (5.9, 8.6)

7.1 (5.8, 8.6)

-0.005 (-0.074, 0.064)

Commercial market

9.8 (8.0, 11.8)

20.4 (18.3, 22.7)

24.1 (21.9, 26.4)

31.6 (29.2, 34.1)

50.3 (47.6, 53.0)

0.254 (0.119, 0.389)

Unknown source

0.3 (0.1, 0.9)

0.6 (0.3, 1.2)

1.1 (0.6, 1.8)

0.3(0.1, 0.8)

0.4 (0.2, 0.9)

-0.045 (-0.295, 0.205)

Any sourceb

33.3 (30.3, 36.1)

57.5 (54.7, 60.2)

63.4 (60.8, 65.9)

69.9 (67.3, 72.1)

81.1 (78.8, 83.0)

0.127 (0.021, 0.234)

  1. a Do not add up to 6338 (see tables 1) because data on households' assets and housing characteristics were collected in forms that were separate from those used for other variables. These two sets of forms were merged using household registration numbers that were supposed to be identical for forms that were related. Some of these related forms were erroneously filled with different numbers that could not be rectified and therefore the study participants had to be dropped for this analysis as they could not be assigned their rightful economic status.
  2. b Proportion of nets obtained from all shown net sources