Skip to main content

Table 3 Measures of association and variation between individual, household- and community-level factors and self-reported malaria in adults aged ≥ 15 years in three provinces, Indonesia

From: Individual and contextual factors predicting self-reported malaria among adults in eastern Indonesia: findings from Indonesian community-based survey

Variable

Maluku

OR (95% CI)

West Papua

OR (95% CI)

Papua

OR (95% CI)

Fixed effect part

 Individual/household-level

  Gender

   Male

1.51 (1.37–1.67)

NA

NA

   Female

Ref

NA

NA

  Occupation

   Not working

Ref

Ref

Ref

   Primary industry workers (farmer, fisherman)

1.29 (1.15–1.46)

1.01 (0.91–1.12)

1.17 (1.09–1.25)

   Tertiary industry workers (services-related occupation)

1.15 (1.00–1.32)

1.12 (1.02–1.23)

1.05 (0.98–1.12)

   Other (undefined)

1.28 (1.01–1.61)

1.04 (0.87–1.25)

1.09 (0.96–1.24)

  Education

   No

Ref

Ref

Ref

   Primary

0.66 (0.52–0.83)

1.11 (0.94–1.31)

1.33 (1.20–1.47)

   Secondary

0.67 (0.53–0.83)

1.04 (0.87–1.24)

1.27 (1.15–1.40)

  Slept using ITN last night

   No

Ref

Ref

Ref

   Yes

1.11 (0.97–1.27)

0.96 (0.87–1.07)

0.88 (0.82–0.94)

  Bed net ownership

   No

Ref

Ref

Ref

   Yes

1.16 (1.02–1.30)

1.21 (1.09–1.34)

1.12 (1.02–1.23)

  House density

   Less than 8/m2

NA

Ref

Ref

   More than 8/m2

NA

1.05 (0.94–1.18)

1.00 (0.94–1.07)

  Access to nearest PHCs

   Not available

0.99 (0.84–1.19)

0.80 (0.68–0.95)

0.86 (0.78–0.95)

   Less than 30 min

Ref

Ref

Ref

   More than 30 min

1.30 (1.01–1.67)

0.75 (0.58–0.98)

0.95 (0.86–1.05)

  Household wealth index

   Poorest

Ref

Ref

Ref

   Poorer

1.05 (0.90–1.20)

0.95 (0.82–1.11)

1.03 (0.94–1.14)

   Middle

0.96 (0.80–1.14)

1.16 (0.98–1.38)

1.13 (0.99–1.30)

   Richer

0.93 (0.77–1.13)

1.38 (1.17–1.65)

1.33 (1.11–1.57)

   Richest

0.99 (0.81–1.22)

1.18 (0.97–1.42)

1.01 (0.84–1.22)

 Village-level

  Proportion of villagers with improved access to safe drinking watera

   Low

Ref

Ref

Ref

   High

0.70 (0.60–0.83)

0.94 (0.71–1.24)

1.03 (0.84–1.26)

  Place of residence

   Rural

1.31 (1.12–1.54)

1.56 (1.17–2.07)

0.47 (0.38–0.59)

   Urban

Ref

Ref

Ref

  Proportion of villagers with had secondary education degreeb

   Low

Ref

Ref

Ref

   High

1.07 (0.89–1.27)

1.28 (1.02–1.63)

1.45 (1.23–1.72)

  Proportion of villagers with bed netc

   Low

Ref

Ref

Ref

   High

1.16 (0.98–1.37)

0.59 (0.45–0.77)

1.26 (1.05–1.51)

  Elevation

   Lowland (< 200 m)

NA

1.12 (0.91–1.37)

0.55 (0.47–0.64)

   Midland (200–1200 m)

NA

Ref

Ref

   Highland (> 1200 m)

 

1.36 (0.96–1.94)

0.83 (0.67–1.02)

  Random-effect part

   Village-level variance (s.e)

0.535 (0.057)

1.345 (0.100)

2.923 (0.159)

   Household-level variance

0.863 (0.118)

0.670 (0.083)

1.203 (0.066)

   PCVd (%)

− 10.68

− 5.68

− 12.03

  1. Italic value indicates a statistically significant association at p-value less than 0.05. NA variable had p-value more than 0.25 at bivariate analysis
  2. OR odds ratio, CI confidence interval, s.e standard error, Ref reference, PCV percent changes in variance, ITN insecticide-treated net, PHC public health centre
  3. aAt least 60% of villagers had access to improved drinking water sources (tap/piped water, boreholes, protected dug wells, protected springs and rainwater collection). Cut-off was determined based on national coverage [4]
  4. bCut-offs were province-specific; the average proportion of population age 15 years or more attained high-school degree based on Provincial Statistical reports
  5. c Cut-offs were varied varied depending on location. Cut-off was based on the province-specific median proportion of bed net ownership [4]
  6. dPCV, percent change in village-level variance between the null model (Model 0) and full model (Model 3)