| Literature DB >> 26293812 |
Chinelo C Okigbo1, Caroline W Kabiru2, Joyce N Mumah3, Sanyu A Mojola4, Donatien Beguy5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated a link between young people's sexual behavior and levels of parental monitoring, parent-child communication, and parental discipline in Western countries. However, little is known about this association in African settings, especially among young people living in high poverty settings such as urban slums. The objective of the study was to assess the influence of parental factors (monitoring, communication, and discipline) on the transition to first sexual intercourse among unmarried adolescents living in urban slums in Kenya.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26293812 PMCID: PMC4546127 DOI: 10.1186/s12978-015-0069-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Reprod Health ISSN: 1742-4755 Impact factor: 3.223
Respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics, by sex
| Total ( | Males ( | Females ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline mean age in years (SE) | 15.2 (0.05) | 15.3 (0.07) | 15.2 (0.07) |
| Baseline age group (%) | |||
| 12–14 year olds | 42.7 | 42.0 | 43.4 |
| 15–17 year olds | 36.3 | 37.1 | 35.5 |
| 18–19 year olds | 21.0 | 20.9 | 21.1 |
| Baseline residence (%) | |||
| Korogocho | 48.4 | 47.0 | 50.1 |
| Viwandani | 51.6 | 53.1 | 50.0 |
| Baseline living arrangements (%) * | |||
| With parent(s) | 94.8 | 91.9 | 98.2 |
| Without parents | 5.2 | 8.1 | 1.8 |
| Baseline school enrollment (%) | |||
| In school | 77.3 | 78.8 | 75.7 |
| Out of school | 22.7 | 21.2 | 24.3 |
| Sexual intercourse status at Wave 2 (%) | |||
| Non-virgins | 21.9 | 23.9 | 19.6 |
| Transitions | 6.0 | 5.9 | 6.0 |
| Virgins | 72.2 | 70.2 | 74.4 |
Notes: Estimates are weighted; SE = Standard Error
*Significant difference at p < 0.05 between males and females based on chi-square tests
Descriptive statistics by sexual intercourse status and by sex
| Males | Females | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-virgins ( | Transitions ( | Virgins ( | Non-virgins ( | Transitions ( | Virgins ( | |
| Baseline sociodemographic characteristics | ||||||
| Mean age (SD) in yearsa, b | 17.3 (1.74) | 16.3 (2.03) | 14.5 (2.04) | 17.3 (1.69) | 16.4 (1.76) | 14.6 (2.07) |
| Residence b (%) | ||||||
| Korogocho | 54.1 | 44.7 | 44.7 | 62.5 | 52.7 | 46.6 |
| Viwandani | 45.9 | 55.3 | 55.3 | 37.5 | 47.3 | 53.4 |
| Living arrangementa, b (%) | ||||||
| With parent(s) | 76.7 | 89.6 | 97.2 | 93.6 | 94.1 | 99.7 |
| School enrollmenta, b (%) | ||||||
| In school | 48.5 | 62.5 | 90.4 | 33.5 | 51.9 | 88.7 |
| Baseline psychosocial controls | ||||||
| Mean (SD) peer models for risk behaviora, b, c | 0.51 (1.21) | 0.19 (1.06) | −0.06 (0.93) | 0.35 (1.16) | −0.01 (0.86) | −0.19 (0.79) |
| Mean (SD) delinquencya, b, c | 0.41 (1.04) | 0.02 (0.59) | 0.01 (0.54) | 0.16 (0.67) | −0.11 (0.40) | −0.17 (0.36) |
| Mean (SD) religiositya, b, c | −0.50 (1.25) | −0.26 (1.15) | 0.00 (0.88) | −0.11 (0.91) | 0.07 (0.69) | 0.19 (0.63) |
| Baseline parenting variables | ||||||
| Parental monitoringa, b (%) | ||||||
| Low/does not live with parent(s) | 61.3 | 47.9 | 36.4 | 54.6 | 34.6 | 17.6 |
| Medium | 25.8 | 23.0 | 30.9 | 31.4 | 36.5 | 36.2 |
| High | 12.9 | 29.1 | 32.7 | 14.0 | 29.0 | 46.2 |
| Parental discipline (scolding)a, b (%) | ||||||
| Not living with parents | 19.6 | 8.9 | 2.3 | 5.3 | 5.9 | 0.1 |
| Never | 10.3 | 17.8 | 10.7 | 15.9 | 17.6 | 10.0 |
| Occasionally | 58.7 | 59.4 | 76.8 | 67.8 | 62.2 | 80.9 |
| Frequently | 11.4 | 13.9 | 10.2 | 11.1 | 14.4 | 9.1 |
| Parental discipline (spanking/slapping)a, b (%) | ||||||
| Not living with parents | 19.6 | 8.9 | 2.3 | 5.3 | 5.9 | 0.1 |
| Never | 62.1 | 68.5 | 44.3 | 72.6 | 74.4 | 50.2 |
| Occasionally | 17.4 | 22.6 | 48.9 | 20.9 | 16.1 | 47.4 |
| Frequently | 0.9 | 0.0 | 4.5 | 1.2 | 3.7 | 2.3 |
| Communication with father figurea, b (%) | ||||||
| Low | 42.9 | 32.7 | 34.8 | 43.7 | 30.7 | 37.3 |
| High | 27.9 | 48.4 | 42.7 | 20.0 | 34.7 | 42.0 |
| No father figure | 29.2 | 18.9 | 22.5 | 36.3 | 34.6 | 20.7 |
| Communication with mother figurea, b (%) | ||||||
| Low | 61.8 | 48.4 | 57.7 | 37.8 | 38.3 | 28.0 |
| High | 29.5 | 34.2 | 39.2 | 57.7 | 56.1 | 70.5 |
| No mother figure | 8.7 | 17.4 | 3.1 | 4.6 | 5.6 | 1.4 |
Notes: Estimates are weighted; SD = Standard Error
aSignificant difference at p < 0.05 across groups for males based on chi-square tests for categorical variables and ANOVA for continuous variables
bSignificant difference at p < 0.05 across groups for females based on chi-square tests for categorical variables and ANOVA for continuous variables
cIncreasing values indicate higher levels of negative peer influence, delinquency, or religiosity
Logistic regression models predicting transition to first sexual intercourse, by sex
| Model variables | Males ( | Females ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 OR (95 % C.I.) | Model 2 OR (95 % C.I.) | Model 3 OR (95 % C.I.) | Model 4 OR (95 % C.I.) | |
| Parenting variables | ||||
| Parental monitoring | ||||
| Low/does not live with parent(s) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Medium | 0.68 (0.33–1.40) | 0.82 (0.37–1.80) | 0.62 (0.31–1.24) | 0.77 (0.34–1.73) |
| High | 0.70 (0.36–1.38) | 0.90 (0.41–1.96) | 0.37 (0.17–0.78)* | 0.56 (0.22–1.47) |
| Parental discipline | ||||
| Scolded (ref = never scolded) | 0.80 (0.37–1.74) | 1.01 (0.42–2.42) | 0.72 (0.32–1.59) | 0.74 (0.29–1.85) |
| Spanked/slapped (ref = never spanked/slapped) | 0.29 (0.15–0.56)* | 0.74 (0.36–1.52) | 0.31 (0.15–0.63)* | 0.55 (0.23–1.29) |
| Communication with father figure | ||||
| No father figure | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Low | 1.32 (0.54–3.21) | 1.15 (0.43–3.05) | 0.44 (0.21–0.93)* | 0.30 (0.13–0.68)* |
| High | 1.88 (0.83–4.26) | 1.89 (0.80–4.45) | 0.69 (0.34–1.42) | 0.72 (0.34–1.51) |
| Communication with mother figure | ||||
| No mother figure | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Low | 0.25 (0.09–0.69)* | 0.23 (0.08–0.64)* | 0.77 (0.08–7.01) | 1.34 (0.23–7.68) |
| High | 0.28 (0.10–0.84)* | 0.33 (0.11–0.96)* | 0.48 (0.05–4.38) | 0.77 (0.14–4.23) |
| Controls | ||||
| Age | --- | 1.36 (1.13–1.64)* | --- | 1.29 (1.10–1.51)* |
| Viwandani (ref = Korogocho) | --- | 1.25 (0.61–2.54) | --- | 0.96 (0.46–2.01) |
| Out-of-school (ref = in-school) | --- | 3.45 (1.63–7.28)* | --- | 3.74 (1.84–7.60)* |
| Peer models for risk behaviora | --- | 1.09 (0.80–1.47) | --- | 1.32 (0.94–1.86) |
| Delinquencya | --- | 0.85 (0.51–1.41) | --- | 1.97 (1.10–3.53)* |
| Religiositya | --- | 0.73 (0.55–0.96)* | --- | 0.92 (0.62–1.35) |
| Model fit | Wald χ2 (8) = 26.99 | Wald χ2 (14) = 53.23 | Wald χ2 (8) = 28.50 | Wald χ2 (14) = 68.55 |
Model 1: unadjusted model for males; Model 2: adjusted model for males; Model 3: unadjusted model for females; Model 4: adjusted model for females
*Statistically significant at p < 0.05
aIncreasing values indicate higher levels of negative peer influence, delinquency, or religiosity