| Literature DB >> 25110673 |
Abstract
This study assesses the effects of maternal healthcare on child survival by using nonrandomized data from a cross-sectional survey in Azerbaijan. Using 2SLS and simultaneous equation bivariate probit models, we estimate the effects of delivering in healthcare facility on probability of child survival taking into account self-selection into the treatment. For women who delivered at healthcare facilities, the probability of child survival increases by approximately 18%. Furthermore, if every woman had the opportunity to deliver in healthcare facility, then the probability of child survival in Azerbaijan as a whole would have increased by approximately 16%.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25110673 PMCID: PMC4119731 DOI: 10.1155/2014/317052
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The effect of delivery in healthcare facility on probability of child survival.
| 2SLS model | Bivariate probit model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef. | Std. Err. |
| Coef. | Std. Err. |
| |
| First equation: instrumented variable is delivery in health care facility; instrumental variables are wealth and birth order | ||||||
| Age 20 or younger | −0.104 | 0.035 | 0.003 | −0.357 | 0.116 | 0.002 |
| Age 36 or older | 0.094 | 0.053 | 0.076 | 0.344 | 0.207 | 0.098 |
| Low birthweight | 0.061 | 0.045 | 0.171 | 0.219 | 0.179 | 0.222 |
| Higher education | 0.077 | 0.022 | 0.000 | 0.660 | 0.199 | 0.001 |
| Wealth | 0.198 | 0.032 | 0.000 | 0.891 | 0.144 | 0.000 |
| Birth order | −0.073 | 0.013 | 0.000 | −0.247 | 0.040 | 0.000 |
| Constant | 0.854 | 0.038 | 0.000 | 1.049 | 0.135 | 0.000 |
|
| ||||||
| Main equation: outcome variable is probability of child survival | ||||||
| Delivery in healthcare facility | 0.151 | 0.063 | 0.016 | 0.923 | 0.347 | 0.008 |
| Age 20 or younger | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.451 | 0.080 | 0.154 | 0.601 |
| Age 36 or older | −0.017 | 0.031 | 0.584 | −0.136 | 0.247 | 0.582 |
| Low birthweight | −0.020 | 0.019 | 0.288 | −0.174 | 0.167 | 0.297 |
| Higher education | −0.032 | 0.022 | 0.144 | −0.164 | 0.199 | 0.410 |
| Constant | 0.843 | 0.051 | 0.000 | 0.969 | 0.319 | 0.002 |
| Number of observations | 2285 | |||||
|
| 1.31 | |||||
| Prob > | 0.000 | |||||
| Number of observations | 2285 | |||||
| Log pseudo-likelihood | −1450000000 | |||||
| Wald | 126.52 | |||||
| Prob > | 0.000 | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Test of endogeneity | ||||||
| Durbin-Wu-Hausman test | 10.49 (0.001) | |||||
|
| 5.647 (0.017) | |||||
|
| −0.424 | |||||
| Wald test | 4.15 (0.041) | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Tests for overidentifying restrictions | ||||||
| Hansen | 0.407 (0.686) | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Tests for the adequacy of instruments | ||||||
| Kleibergen-Paap LM statistic and | 42.93 (0.000) | |||||
|
| ||||||
| Effects of treatment | ||||||
| ATE (average effect of treatment) | 0.161 | |||||
| ATT (average effect of treatment to the treated) | 0.184 | |||||
Notes: (1) dependent variable in the first stage is healthcarefacility delivery = 1; otherwise = 0. Dependent variable in the second stage is child survival = 1; otherwise = 0.
(2) *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, and ***P < 0.001.
(3) Results adjusted to heteroskedasticity and clustering.
(4) Data are rounded up
Source: 2006 Azerbaijan Demographic and Health Survey [17].