| Literature DB >> 30764797 |
Albino Kalolo1, Jacob Mazalale2, Anja Krumeich3, Michelene Chenault3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social cohesion, defined as a glue holding society together, has been found to influence several aspects of human behavior. Social cohesion, being composed of social trust and social participation, is a social factor that may influence sexual behaviors. Unfortunately, studies investigating the influence of social cohesion on sexual behaviors among young people are scarce. This study examined the influence of social cohesion on safe sexual behavior among adolescents in rural Tanzania.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescents; Rural Tanzania; Sexual behaviors; Social cohesion; Social participation; Social trust
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30764797 PMCID: PMC6376705 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-019-6428-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Univariate description of the study sample (N = 403)
| Variable |
| % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Social participation at school ( | |||
| Weak coherent | 53 | 21 | |
| 2 | 51 | 21 | |
| 3 | 50 | 20 | |
| 4 | 80 | 32 | |
| Strongest coherent | 13 | 5 | |
| Social participation at the community ( | |||
| Weak coherent | 122 | 30 | |
| 2 | 40 | 10 | |
| 3 | 81 | 20 | |
| 4 | 89 | 22 | |
| Strongest coherent | 71 | 18 | |
| Age ( | |||
| 14–16 years old | 127 | 32 | |
| 17–19 years old | 276 | 68 | |
| Religion ( | |||
| Non Muslim | 52 | 13 | |
| Muslim | 351 | 87 | |
| Sex ( | |||
| Male | 203 | 50 | |
| Female | 200 | 50 | |
| Overall cohesion | |||
| Weak coherent | 92 | 23 | |
| 2 | 74 | 18 | |
| 3 | 76 | 19 | |
| 4 | 81 | 20 | |
| Strongest coherent | 80 | 20 | |
aPlease note that 247 were going to schools which provided training on life skills for HIV and AIDS prevention
Levels of sexual behaviors among the respondents
| Variable | Measurements |
| % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intention to engage is safe sex | |||
| No | 92 | 23 | |
| Yes | 311 | 77 | |
| Age at sex debut | |||
| old > 13 yrs | 354 | 88 | |
| young ≤13 yrs | 49 | 12 | |
| Number of sexual partners in the past 12 months | |||
| had one partner | 117 | 29 | |
| had multiple partners | 286 | 71 | |
| Condom use during last sexual encounter ( | |||
| Used a condom | 78 | 50 | |
| Did not use a condom | 77 | 50 | |
2Please note that there were 155 students who had started having sex by the date of the study
Bivariate relationship between explanatory variables and sexual behaviours
| Variable | Age at sexual debut (young ≤ 13 yrs) | Multiple sexual partners (> 1 partner) | No intention to use condom | No condom use | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | ||||||
| Social participation at school ( | |||||||||
| Weak participation | 8 (15) | 0.32 | 7 (27) | 0.6 | 18 (75) | 0.07 | 12 (23) | 0.55 | |
| 2 | 5 (10) | 3 (15) | 9 (47) | 12 (24) | |||||
| 3 | 3 (6) | 4 (29) | 8 (62) | 7 (14) | |||||
| 4 | 14 (18) | 13 (34) | 16 (44) | 14 (18) | |||||
| Strongest participation | 1 (8) | 2 (40) | 1 (20) | 4 (31) | |||||
| Social participation at the community (n = 403) | |||||||||
| Weak participation | 12 (10) | 0.63 | 12 (31) | 0.2 | 16 (44) | 0.76 | 31 (25) | 0.85 | |
| 2 | 6 (15) | 3 (21) | 7 (58) | 8 (20) | |||||
| 3 | 9 (11) | 5 (15) | 15 (50) | 17 (21) | |||||
| 4 | 10 (11) | 13 (30) | 25 (57) | 18 (20) | |||||
| Strongest participation | 12 (17) | 14 (41) | 15 (45) | 18 (25) | |||||
| Age ( | |||||||||
| 14–16 years old | 16 (13) | 0.86 | 3 (12) | 0.045 | 12 (50) | 0.97 | 33 (26) | 0.31 | |
| 17–19 years old | 33 (12) | 44 (32) | 50.38 (0) | 59 (21) | |||||
| Religion ( | |||||||||
| Non Muslim | 7 (13) | 0.76 | 6 (27) | 0.88 | 13 (65) | 0.16 | 10 (19) | 0.51 | |
| Muslim | 42 (12) | 41 (29) | 65 (48) | 82 (23) | |||||
| Sex ( | |||||||||
| Male | 37 (18) | < 0.001 | 32 (34) | 0.08 | 42 (47) | 0.28 | 53 (26) | 0.11 | |
| Female | 12 (6) | 15 (21) | 36 (55) | 39 (20) | |||||
Logistic regression model for explanatory variables and sexual behaviors
| Variable | Age at sexual debut (young ≤13 yrs) | Multiple sexual partners (> 1 partner | Intention to use condom | Reported condom use | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR(95% CI) | OR(95% CI) | OR(95% CI) | |||||
| Social cohesion | ||||||||
| Low social cohesion | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Medium social cohesion | 0.51 (0.19–1.33) | 0.17 | 0.87 (0.28–2.65) | 0.8 | 1.87 (0.85–4.11) | 0.11 | 4.83 (1.66–14.06) | 0.00 |
| High social cohesion | 1.86 (0.62–5.57) | 0.26 | 2.36 (0.66–8.37) | 0.18 | 1.16 (0.47–2.83) | 0.73 | 2.31 (0.70–7.63) | |
| Social trust | ||||||||
| Low social trust | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Medium social trust | 2.6 (0.94–7.17) | 0.06 | 3.52 (1.01–12.30) | 0.04 | 1.42 (0.59–3.39) | 0.42 | 0.98 (0.29–3.24) | 0.98 |
| High social trust | 1.71 (0.58–4.98) | 0.32 | 1.98 (0.59–6.69) | 0.26 | 0.64 (0.30–1.35) | 0.24 | 1.251 (0.38–4.03) | 0.71 |
| Social participation | ||||||||
| Low social participation | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Medium social participation | 0.81 (0.26–2.46) | 0.7 | 0.73 (0.19–2.76) | 0.64 | 2.73 (0.92–8.10) | 0.06 | 0.367 (0.10–1.33) | 0.12 |
| High social participation | 0.55 (0.20–1.47) | 0.23 | 1.15 (0.35–3.80) | 0.81 | 1.16 (0.55–2.45) | 0.68 | 1.42 (0.45–4.41) | 0.54 |
| Age | ||||||||
| 14–16 years | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| 17–19 years | 0.76 (0.33–1.75) | 0.52 | 5.06 (0.83–30.74) | 0.07 | 1.98 (0.94–4.17) | 0.07 | 1.42 (0.37–5.41) | 0.16 |
| Sex | ||||||||
| Male | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Female | 0.21 (0.07–0.57) | 0.002 | 0.61 (0.22–1.72) | 0.35 | 2.07 (1.04–4.12) | 0.03 | 0.44 (0.17–1.11) | 0.08 |
| Religion | ||||||||
| Non-Muslim | Reference | Reference | Reference | Reference | ||||
| Muslim | 0.99 (0.28–3.44) | 0.99 | 1.21 (0.19–7.59) | 0.83 | 0.68 (0.24–1.92) | 0.47 | 3.07 (0.72–3.04) | 0.12 |