Skip to main content

Table 4 Multivariable Multinomial Logistic Regression modeliInvestigating predictors of different choices of providers among patients in recent febrile illness

From: Choice of health providers and health-seeking behaviour among forest goer population in Myanmar: findings from a cross-sectional household survey

Characteristic

Provider choice for recent fever

Public sector

Semi-private

Outside

RRR

(95% CI)

RRR

(95% CI)

RRR

(95% CI)

Age a

0.97b

(0.94–1.00)

0.98

(0.95–1.01)

0.98

(0.96–1.00)

Gender

 Female

As reference

     

 Male

1.16

(0.42–3.22)

0.3

(0.09–1.03)

1.15

(0.58–2.29)

Socio-economic quintile

 Poorest quintile

As reference

     

 2nd poorest quintile

1.17

(0.21–6.70)

0.31

(0.03–3.63)

2.17

(0.76–6.15)

 Middle quintile

4.77

(0.91–25.16)

1.85

(0.33–10.34)

1.96

(0.77–5.01)

 2nd richest quintile

12.85c

(1.93–85.41)

17.93c

(2.77–116.05)

8.39c

(2.54–27.76)

 Richest quintile

3.24

(0.28–38.11)

3.94

(0.34–46.12)

4.81

(0.62–37.31)

Access to no. of providers in the village

 Access to 1–3 providers

As reference

     

 Access to ≥ 4 providers

30.27c

(6.13–149.41)

1.54c

(2.78–47.88)

0.48

(0.22–1.07)

Malaria transmission

 Having incorrect knowledge

As reference

     

 Having correct knowledge

0.36

(0.09–1.40)

0.17b

(0.04–0.70)

1.35

(0.54–3.36)

 Constant

0.06b

(0.01–0.51)

0.27

 

0.66

(0.21–2.05)

Multivariable Multinomial Logistic Regression model investigating predictors of different choice of providers among forest goers in past febrile illness that occur in the village and forest

 

Provider choice for fever in village

Provider choice for fever in forest

Public

Semi-private

Outside

Public

Semi-private

Outside

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

Age a

1.02

(0.99–1.05)

1.04b

(1.01–1.07)

1.01

(0.98–1.03)

1.03

(0.99–1.06)

1.03b

(1.00–1.07)

1.01

(0.99–1.04)

Gender

 Female

As reference

          

 Male

1.24

(0.38–4.06)

3.92

(0.80–19.17)

0.55

(0.27–1.12)

1.03

(0.32–3.30)

7.06

(0.88–56.51)

0.76

(0.37–1.57)

Socio-economic quintile

 Poorest quintile

As reference

          

 2nd poorest quintile

2.84

(0.86–9.36)

2.03

(0.51–8.00)

1.99

(0.88–4.52)

5.19b

(1.28–21.04)

2.06

(0.59–7.18)

2.06

(0.91–4.65)

 Middle quintile

0.94

(0.26–3.46)

2.2

(0.62–7.82)

1.64

(0.74–3.61)

1.89

(0.44–8.14)

1.79

(0.55–5.91)

1.71

(0.78–3.75)

 2nd richest quintile

4.21b

(1.20–14.82)

6.35c

(1.71–23.56)

4.71c

(1.95–11.37)

7.57c

(1.76–32.60)

5.00b

(1.43–17.52)

5.36c

(2.25–12.76)

 Richest quintile

20.21c

(3.05–133.88)

6.66

(0.69–64.54)

2.77

(0.22–34.70)

37.18c

(4.83–286.02)

2.99

(0.22–40.64)

2.27

(0.19–27.83)

Access to no. of providers in the village

 Access to 1–3 providers

As reference

          

 Access to ≥ 4 providers

5.43c

(2.36–12.51)

5.45c

(2.31–12.87)

0.18c

(0.06–0.54)

6.00c

(2.56–14.09)

3.45c

(1.45–8.18)

0.41b

(0.17–0.95)

Education of main income earner

 Illiterate or primary education

As reference

  

 Secondary and above education

2.89b

(1.27–6.57)

1.77

(0.76–4.12)

1.56

(0.86–2.84)

3.39c

(1.44–7.96)

1.78

(0.77–4.12)

1.61

(0.89–2.91)

 Constant

0.00c

(0.00–0.06)

0.00c

(0.00–0.02)

0.21

(0.04–1.09)

0.00c

(0.00–0.03)

0.00c

(0.00–0.03)

0.11c

(0.02–0.57)

Multivariable Multinomial Logistic Regression model investigating predictors of different choice of providers among forest goers for RDT testing in past febrile illness that occured in the village and forest

 

Provider choice for m-RDT testing in village

Provider choice for m-RDT testing in forest

Non-CHW/CHV

Outside

Non-CHW/CHV

Outside

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

RRR

95%CI

Age a

1.02

(0.99–1.05)

1.01

(0.99–1.04)

1.01

(0.98–1.04)

1.01

(0.98–1.04)

Gender

 Female

As reference

       

 Male

2.05

(0.68–6.18)

1.52

(0.61–3.76)

1.91

(0.58–6.29)

1.62

(0.61–4.25)

Socio-economic quintile

 Poorest quintile

As reference

       

 2nd poorest quintile

1.99

(0.65–6.06)

0.74

(0.30–1.84)

1.65

(0.53–5.08)

0.8

(0.32–2.01)

 Middle quintile

1.51

(0.51–4.45)

0.54

(0.22–1.32)

1.15

(0.38–3.49)

0.54

(0.21–1.37)

 2nd richest quintile

4.55c

(1.55–13.37)

2.46b

(1.07–5.67)

4.28b

(1.44–12.66)

2.85b

(1.22–6.69)

 Richest quintile

9.92c

(1.81–54.51)

3.51

(0.61–20.11)

9.81b

(1.79–53.70)

3.64

(0.63–20.92)

Access to no. of providers in the village

 Access to 1–3 providers

As reference

       

 Access to ≥ 4 providers

4.68c

(2.22–9.89)

1.23

(0.61–2.51)

4.19c

(1.94–9.06)

1.36

(0.66–2.79)

Malaria prevention

 Having incorrect Knowledge

As reference

       

 Having correct Knowledge

0.39b

(0.18–0.87)

0.56

(0.28–1.10)

0.41b

(0.18–0.94)

0.68

(0.35–1.34)

 Constant

0.02c

(0.00–0.16)

0.16b

(0.03–0.70)

0.04

(0.01–0.29)

0.12

(0.03–0.59)

  1. CHW/CHV as base outcome
  2. acontinuous variable
  3. bp < 0.05
  4. cp < 0.01