| Literature DB >> 30422101 |
Sanjeev Sridharan1, Amanda Pereira2, Katherine Hay3, Arnab Dey4, Dharmendra Chandurkar4, Scott Veldhuizen5, April Nakaima6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This paper explores the heterogeneities in antenatal care (ANC) utilization in India's most populated state, Uttar Pradesh. Taking an intersectionality lens, multiple individual- and district-level factors are used to identify segments of any antenatal care usage in Uttar Pradesh Objective: This paper seeks to understand the multilevel contexts of ANC utilization. The planning and programming challenge is that such knowledge of contextual specificity is rarely known upfront at the initial stages of planning or implementing an intervention. Exploratory data analysis might be needed to identify such contextual specificity.Entities:
Keywords: India; Inequities; Uttar Pradesh; antenatal care; evaluation; maternal health
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30422101 PMCID: PMC6237162 DOI: 10.1080/16549716.2018.1517929
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Glob Health Action ISSN: 1654-9880 Impact factor: 2.640
Figure 1.Example of direct and interaction effects of social determinants on health gradient.
Figure 2.How context can potentially moderate the influence of the social determinants of health on the health gradient: a hypothetical illustrative example.
Descriptive statistics for dependent and independent variables.
| Variables | Percentage or mean | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Receipt of any antenatal care checkup (%, SD) | 5,666 | 50.76% | 0.50 |
| Sex ratio in district (mean, SD) | 49 | 910.86 | 34.29 |
| Proportion of marginalized workers in the district (%, SD) | 49 | 33.06% | 10.54 |
| Proportion of illiterate population in the district (cannot read and write) (%, SD) | 49 | 45.10% | 6.72 |
| Respondent’s religion in Hindu (%, SD) | 5,666 | 82.07% | 0.38 |
| Respondent belongs to Schedule Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) (%, SD) | 5,666 | 29.63% | 0.46 |
| Respondent belongs to Other Backward Classes (OBC) (%, SD) | 5,666 | 57.17% | 0.49 |
| Respondent owns a house (%, SD) | 5,666 | 84.75% | 0.36 |
| Respondent or any member of the her household have a bank account (%, SD) | 5,666 | 88.63% | 0.32 |
| Respondent makes her own decision about her health care (%, SD) | 5,666 | 60.36% | 0.49 |
| Respondent is allowed to go to the Health Centre on her own (%, SD) | 5,666 | 18.81% | 0.39 |
| Respondent is literate (can read and write) (%, SD) | 5,666 | 43.17% | 0.50 |
| Respondent had a job in the last 1 year (%, SD) | 5,666 | 7.25% | 0.26 |
| Respondent was married at an age of 15 years or lower (%, SD) | 5,666 | 61.33% | 0.49 |
| Respondent ever attended school (%, SD) | 5,666 | 46.59% | 0.50 |
| Husband of the responded ever attended any school (%, SD) | 5,666 | 75.40% | 0.43 |
| Number of members per sleeping room in the household (mean, SD) | 5,666 | 0.39 | 0.30 |
| Respondents age at the time of interview (mean, SD) | 5,666 | 26.64 | 4.65 |
| Wealth Index of the householda (mean, SD) | 5,666 | 0.01 | 3.02 |
aThe wealth index is calculated for each household by combining a number of crucial household level assets and household characteristics. Principal component analysis was used to develop a continuous wealth index score.
Figure 3.Tree diagram of any antenatal care usage in Uttar Pradesh.
Figure 4.Heterogeneities in utilization of any antenatal care.
Results of the multilevel model with interaction terms included for receipt of any antenatal care checkup.
| Variables | Odds ratio | 95% CI of odds ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex ratio in district | −0.001 | 0.99 | (0.99, 1.01) | −0.23 |
| Proportion of marginalized workers in the district | 0.012 | 1.00 | (0.99,1.03) | 1.66 |
| Proportion of illiterate population in the district (cannot read and write) | 0.004 | 1.01 | (0.99, 1.02) | 0.49 |
| Respondent’s religion in Hindu | −0.148 | 0.86 | (0.71,1.05) | −1.51 |
| Respondent belongs to Schedule Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) | −0.230 | 0.79 | (0.62,1.02) | −1.79 |
| Respondent belongs to Other Backward Classes (OBC) | −0.312** | 0.73 | (0.58, 0.92) | −2.63 |
| Respondent owns a house | 1.037*** | 2.80 | (2.31, 3.45) | 10.16 |
| Respondent or any member of the her household have a bank account | 0.117 | 1.12 | (0.91,1.40) | 1.06 |
| Respondent makes her own decision about her health care | −0.091 | 0.91 | (0.81,1.03) | −1.50 |
| Respondent is allowed to go to the Health Centre on her own | −0.068 | 0.93 | (0.81,1.08) | −0.91 |
| Respondent is literate (can read and write) | 0.470** | 1.60 | (1.22,2.10) | 3.39 |
| Respondent ever attended any school | −0.099 | 0.91 | (0.70, 1.17) | −0.77 |
| Respondent had a job in the last 1 year | 0.297* | 1.35 | (1.07,1.70) | 2.51 |
| Respondent was married at an age of 15 years or lower | −0.337*** | 0.71 | (0.63,0.81) | −5.18 |
| Husband of the responded ever attended any school | 0.256*** | 1.29 | (1.14,1.46) | 4.00 |
| Number of members per sleeping room in the household | −0.189 | 0.83 | (0.65,1.05) | −1.54 |
| Wealth Index of the household | 0.102*** | 1.11 | (1.08,1.14) | 8.22 |
| Respondents age at the time of interview | −0.031*** | 0.97 | (0.96,0.98) | −5.30 |
| Ownership of home × sex ratio | 0.009** | 1.01 | (1.00, 1.01) | 3.22 |
| Literacy × sex ratio | −0.004* | 0.99 | (0.99, 1.00) | −2.57 |
Level of significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.