Table 2 Multilevel binary logistic regression results on the predictors of pregnancy termination among women with unmet/met need for contraception in sub-Saharan Africa
Variables | Model 0 | Model 1 OR (95% CI) | Model 2 OR (95% CI) | Model 3 AOR (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Individual level | ||||
 Unmet need for contraception | ||||
  Unmet need |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  Met need |  | 1.11*** (1.07, 1.12) |  | 1.11*** (1.07, 1.12) |
 Age | ||||
  15–19 |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  20–24 |  | 1.87*** (1.76, 1.98) |  | 1.87*** (1.77, 1.98) |
  25–29 |  | 2.86*** (2.69, 3.03) |  | 2.87*** (2.71, 3.04) |
  30–34 |  | 3.77*** (3.54, 4.01) |  | 3.79*** (3.55, 4.03) |
  35–39 |  | 4.73*** (4.43, 5.05) |  | 4.76*** (4.46, 5.08) |
  40–44 |  | 5.74*** (5.36, 6.14) |  | 5.78*** (5.39, 6.18) |
  45–49 |  | 6.17*** (5.72, 6.65) |  | 6.22*** (5.77, 6.71) |
 Level of education | ||||
  No education |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  Primary |  | 1.25*** (1.21, 1.28) |  | 1.25*** (1.22, 1.29) |
  Secondary |  | 1.32*** (1.28, 1.36) |  | 1.33*** (1.28, 1.37) |
  Higher |  | 1.13 (1.07, 1.20) |  | 1.14 (1.08, 1.21) |
 Marital status | ||||
  Single |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  Married |  | 1.68*** (1.60, 1.77) |  | 1.66*** (1.58, 1.75) |
  Cohabitation |  | 2.58*** (2.45, 2.72) |  | 2.53*** (2.39, 2.67) |
  Widowed |  | 1.45*** (1.31, 1.62) |  | 1.49*** (1.34, 1.67) |
  Separated |  | 2.14*** (2.00, 2.31) |  | 2.17*** (2.03, 2.32) |
 Parity | ||||
  Zero birth |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  One birth |  | 0.75*** (0.71, 0.79) |  | 0.75*** (0.71, 0.79) |
  Two births |  | 0.69*** (0.65, 0.72) |  | 0.69*** (0.65, 0.72) |
  Three births |  | 0.63*** (0.61, 0.67) |  | 0.63*** (0.61, 0.67) |
  Four or more births |  | 0.62*** (0.59, 0.66) |  | 0.62*** (0.59, 0.66) |
 Wealth status | ||||
  Poorest |  | 1 |  | 1 |
  Poorer |  | 1.02 (0.99, 1.06) |  | 1.02 (0.99, 1.05) |
  Middle |  | 0.97*** (0.94, 1.01) |  | 0.97*** (0.93, 0.99) |
  Richer |  | 0.98*** (0.95, 1.01) |  | 0.95*** (0.92, 0.99) |
  Richest |  | 0.99*** (0.96, 1.03) |  | 0.94*** (0.90, 0.98) |
Community level | ||||
 Place of residence | ||||
  Urban |  |  | 1 | 1 |
  Rural |  |  | 0.89*** (0.86, 0.91) | 0.92*** (0.91, 0.95) |
 Sex of household head | ||||
  Male |  |  | 1 | 1 |
  Female |  |  | 0.93*** (0.91, 0.95) | 0.93*** (0.91, 0.96) |
 Socio-economic disadvantage | ||||
  Tertile 1 (Least disadvantage) |  |  | 1 | 1 |
  Tertile 2 |  |  | 1.05* (1.01, 1.09) | 1.10*** (1.06, 1.15) |
  Tertile 3 (Most disadvantage) |  |  | 1.03 (0.99, 1.07) | 1.09*** (1.05, 1.14) |
 Random effect result | ||||
  PSU variance (95% CI) | 0.02 (0.1, 0.02) | 0.02 (0.02, 0.03) | 0.02 (0.01, 0.02) | 0.02 (0.02, 0.03) |
  ICC | 0.57 | 0.71 | 0.58 | 0.71 |
  LR Test | χ2 = 158.11 p = 0.0000 | χ2 = 196.68 p = 0.0000 | χ2 = 157.85 p = 0.0000 | χ2 = 200.96 p = 0.0000 |
  Wald chi-square |  | 7504.43 | 135.42 | 7584.83 |
 Model fitness | ||||
  Log-likelihood | −114,738.7 | −110,515.6 | −114,671.1 | −110,472.8 |
  BIC | 229502.3 | 221330.9 | 229417.1 | 221295.2 |
  AIC | 229481.3 | 221079.1 | 229354.2 | 221295.5 |
  N | 265,505 | 265,505 | 265,505 | 265,505 |