| Literature DB >> 32714432 |
Cheru Atsmegiorgis Kitabo1, Ehit Tesfu Damtie2.
Abstract
In sub-Saharan Africa, 72% of pregnant women received an antenatal care visit at least once in their pregnancy period. Ethiopia has one of the highest rates of maternal mortality in sub-Saharan African countries. So, this high maternal mortality levels remain a major public health problem. According to EDHS, 2016, the antenatal care (ANC), delivery care (DC), and postnatal care (PNC) were 62%, 73%, and 13%, respectively, indicating that ANC is in a low level. The main objective of this study was to examine the factors that affect the utilization of antenatal care services in Ethiopia using Bayesian multilevel logistic regression models. The data used for this study comes from the 2016 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey which was conducted by the Central Statistical Agency (CSA). The statistical method of data analysis used for this study is the Bayesian multilevel binary logistic regression model in general and the Bayesian multilevel logistic regression for the random coefficient model in particular. The convergences of parameters are estimated by using Markov chain Monte-Carlo (MCMC) using SPSS and MLwiN software. The descriptive result revealed that out of the 7171 women who are supposed to use ANC services, 2479 (34.6%) women were not receiving ANC services, while 4692 (65.4%) women were receiving ANC services. Moreover, women in the Somali and Afar regions are the least users of ANC. Using the Bayesian multilevel binary logistic regression of random coefficient model factors, place of residence, religion, educational attainment of women, husband educational level, employment status of husband, beat, household wealth index, and birth order were found to be the significant factors for usage of ANC. Regional variation in the usage of ANC was significant.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32714432 PMCID: PMC7355362 DOI: 10.1155/2020/8749753
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Math Methods Med ISSN: 1748-670X Impact factor: 2.238
Statistical measures depicting the relationship between ANC usage and some socioeconomic and demographic variables.
| Variables | Category | Count | % | Usage of ANC | Df | chi-sq |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No (%) | Yes (%) | |||||||
| Educational attainment of women | No education | 4344 | 60.6 | 2018 (46.45) | 2326 (53.55%) | 3 | 742.1 |
|
| Primary | 1937 | 27.0 | 398 (20.55%) | 1539 (79.45%) | ||||
| Secondary | 575 | 8.0 | 56 (9.74%) | 519 (90.26%) | ||||
| Higher | 315 | 4.4 | 7 (2.22%) | 308 (97.78%) | ||||
| Wealth index | Poor | 3602 | 50.2 | 1777 (49.33%) | 1825 (50.67%) | 2 | 784.69 |
|
| Medium | 1022 | 14.3 | 321 (31.41%) | 701 (68.59%) | ||||
| Rich | 2547 | 35.5 | 381 (14.96%) | 2166 (85.04%) | ||||
| Place of residence | Urban | 1505 | 21.0 | 117 (7.77%) | 1388 (92.23%) | 1 | 604.63 |
|
| Rural | 5666 | 79.0 | 2362 (41.69%) | 3304 (58.31%) | ||||
| Women's occupation | Not working | 4054 | 56.7 | 1593 (39.29%) | 2461 (60.71%) | 1 | 92.046 |
|
| Working | 3117 | 43.3 | 886 (28.42%) | 2231 (71.58%) | ||||
| Husband occupation | Not working | 674 | 9.4 | 342 (50.74%) | 332 (49.26) | 1 | 85.21 |
|
| Working | 5969 | 83.2 | 1963 (32.89) | 4006 (67.11) | ||||
| Missing | 528 | 7.4 | ||||||
| Husband educational level | No education | 3124 | 43.6 | 1519 (48.94) | 1605 (51.38) | 3 | 568.08 |
|
| Primary | 2156 | 30.1 | 591 (27.41) | 1565 (72.59) | ||||
| Secondary | 744 | 10.4 | 109 (14.65) | 635 (85.35) | ||||
| Higher | 619 | 8.6 | 86 (13.89) | 533 (86.11) | ||||
| Missing | 528 | 7.4 | ||||||
| Age of respondents | 15-24 | 1850 | 25.8 | 573 (30.97%) | 1277 (69.03%) | 2 | 68.92 |
|
| 25-34 | 3532 | 49.3 | 1144 (32.39%) | 2388 (67.61%) | ||||
| 35-49 | 1789 | 24.9 | 762 (42.59%) | 1027 (57.41%) | ||||
| Birth order | 1-4 | 4547 | 63.4 | 1264 (27.81%) | 3283 (72.20%) | 2 | 262.53 |
|
| 5-8 | 2212 | 30.8 | 996 (45.03%) | 1217 (55.02%) | ||||
| >8 | 411 | 5.7 | 219 (53.28%) | 192 (46.72%) | ||||
| Religion | Orthodox | 2360 | 32.9 | 511 (21.65%) | 1849 (78.35%) | 4 | 309.97 |
|
| Catholic | 49 | 0.7 | 11 (22.45%) | 28 (57.14%) | ||||
| Protestant | 1337 | 18.6 | 484 (36.20%) | 853 (63.8%) | ||||
| Muslim | 3313 | 46.2 | 1387 (41.87%) | 1926 (58.13%) | ||||
| Other | 112 | 1.6 | 76 (67.86%) | 36 (32.14%) | ||||
| Decision making | Women | 1179 | 16.4 | 382 (32.4%) | 797 (67.6%) | 1 | 66.04 |
|
| Both | 4120 | 58 | 1330 (32.18%) | 2790 (67.8%) | ||||
| Husband | 1344 | 18.2 | 593 (44.82%) | 751 (55.18%) | ||||
| Missing | 528 | 7.4 | ||||||
Statistical significance at 5%.
Bayesian multilevel logistic regression model comparison.
| Empty model | Random intercept | Random coefficient | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deviance (MCMC) | 6889.59 | 6040.15 | 5979.97 |
| Deviance based chi-square test | 906.42 | 298.02 | 290.47 |
|
|
|
|
|
Statistical significance at 5%.
Bayesian deviance information criteria.
|
|
| pD | DIC | Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6889.60 | 6459.95 | 429.65 | 7319.25 | Bayesian multilevel null model |
| 6040.15 | 5703.45 | 336.71 | 6376.86 | Random intercept model |
| 5979.98 | 5606.13 | 5591.61 | 6368.35 | Random coefficient model |
Bayesian multilevel logistic regression empty model.
| Fixed part | Estimate | S.E |
|
|
| Intercept | 1.215 | 0.079 | 15.38 | 0.002 |
| Random part | Estimate | S.E | ||
| Var( | 2.830 | 0.273 | ||
| ICC | 0.4624 |
Statistical significance at 5%.
Results of the random coefficient Bayesian multilevel logistic regression model.
| Fixed effect |
|
| S.E |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.696 | 5.452 | 0.212 | 8.00 | 0.002 |
|
| |||||
| Urban (ref) | |||||
| Rural | -1.578 | 0.206 | 0.171 | 9.228 |
|
|
| |||||
| No (ref) | |||||
| Yes | -0.146 | 0.864 | 0.067 | 2.179 | 0.002 |
|
| |||||
| 15-24 (ref) | |||||
| 25-34 | 0.124 | 1.132 | 0.105 | 1.181 | 0.167 |
| 35-49 | -0.083 | 0.92 | 0.133 | 0.624 | 0.273 |
|
| |||||
| 1-4 (ref) | |||||
| 5-8 | -0.23 | 0.795 | 0.093 | 2.473 | 0.002 |
| >8 | -0.33 | 0.719 | 0.159 | 2.075 | 0.026 |
|
| |||||
| Orthodox (ref) | |||||
| Catholic | -1.094 | 0.335 | 0.451 | 2.426 | 0.034 |
| Protestant | -0.707 | 0.493 | 0.147 | 4.809 | 0.009 |
| Muslim | -0.473 | 0.623 | 0.134 | 3.529 | 0.020 |
| Other | -1.375 | 0.252 | 0.313 | 4.393 |
|
|
| |||||
| Not working (ref) | |||||
| Working | 0.352 | 1.421 | 0.108 | 3.259 |
|
|
| |||||
| Poor (ref) | |||||
| Medium | 0.452 | 1.571 | 0.099 | 4.566 |
|
| Rich | 0.642 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 6.42 |
|
|
| |||||
| No education (ref) | |||||
| Primary | 0.436 | 1.547 | 0.083 | 5.253 |
|
| Secondary | 0.645 | 1.906 | 0.154 | 4.188 |
|
| Higher | 0.178 | 1.195 | 0.182 | 0.978 | 0.045 |
Statistical significance at 5%; ref = categorical reference.
Results for fixed and random effects of the Bayesian multilevel random coefficient model.
| Covariates |
|
| S.E |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| No education(ref) | |||||
| Primary | 0.719 | 2.052 | 0.113 | 6.363 |
|
| Secondary | 1.226 | 3.408 | 0.224 | 5.473 |
|
| Higher | 2.362 | 10.612 | 0.502 | 4.705 |
|
|
| Estimated variance | S.E | |||
| Var(( | 1.361 | 0.173 | |||
| Var( | 0.440 | 0.181 | |||
| Cov( | -0.168 | 0.173 |
Statistical significance at 5%; ref = reference category.
Results of the binary logistic regression model.
| Covariates |
| S.E | Wald | Df | Sig. | Exp (B) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 15.635 | 2 |
| |||
| Urban (ref) | ||||||
| Rural | -1.244 | 0.126 | 97.266 | 1 |
| 0.288 |
|
| 2.713 | 2 | 0.258 | |||
| No (ref) | ||||||
| Yes | -0.602 | 0.390 | 2.381 | 1 | 0.123 | 0.548 |
|
| 5.285 | 2 | 0.071 | |||
| 15-24 (ref) | ||||||
| 25-34 | -0.344 | 0.075 | 20.883 | 1 |
| 0.709 |
| 35-49 | -0.455 | 0.136 | 11.166 | 1 |
| 0.634 |
|
| 23.048 | 2 |
| |||
| 1-4 (ref) | ||||||
| 5-8 | 0.455 | 0.136 | 11.166 | 1 |
| 1.577 |
| >8 | 0.111 | 0.123 | 0.812 | 1 | 0.367 | 1.117 |
|
| 125.421 | 4 |
| |||
| Orthodox (ref) | ||||||
| Catholic | -1.256 | 0.336 | 13.991 | 1 |
| 0.285 |
| Protestant | -0.761 | 0.089 | 73.755 | 1 |
| 0.467 |
| Muslim | -0.635 | 0.071 | 79.030 | 1 |
| 0.530 |
| Other | -1.552 | 0.237 | 42.982 | 1 |
| 0.212 |
|
| 35.762 | 1 | ||||
| No (ref) | ||||||
| Yes | 0.427 | 0.092 | 21.622 | 1 |
| 1.533 |
|
| 123.468 | 2 |
| |||
| Poor (ref) | ||||||
| Medium | 0.568 | 0.082 | 48.128 | 1 |
| 1.764 |
| Rich | 0.808 | 0.080 | 101.434 | 1 |
| 2.244 |
|
| 134.630 | 4 |
| |||
| No Edu. (ref) | ||||||
| Primary | 1.054 | 0.125 | 71.367 | 1 |
| 2.868 |
| Secondary | 0.904 | 0.152 | 35.218 | 1 |
| 2.470 |
| Higher | 0.155 | 0.335 | 0.213 | 1 | 0.644 | 1.167 |
| Constant | 1.367 | 0.175 | 60.958 | 1 |
| 3.925 |
Statistical significance at 5%; ref = categorical reference.
Statistical measures used to compare the goodness of fit of the binary logistic and multilevel random coefficient model.
| Model comparison measures | Binary logistic regression | Multilevel random coefficient model |
|---|---|---|
| -2∗log likelihood | -7593.75 | -5673.29 |
| Deviance based on Chi-square | 1222.079 | 290.47 |
| AIC (DIC) | 7631.749 | 6368.35 |