Skip to main content

Advertisement

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