Skip to main content

Table 2 Risk factors for utilization of cervical cancer screening services: Crude and age-adjusted analysis using logistic regression, 2010

From: Utilization of cervical cancer screening services and its associated factors among primary school teachers in Ilala Municipality, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Variable

Crude

Age - adjusted

 

OR (95 % CI)

P value

OR (95 % CI)

P value

Age group (in years)

    

 20–29

Ref

   

 30–39

0.60(0.35–1.04)

0.064

-

-

 40–49

0.51(0.26–0.99)

0.047

-

-

 50 and above

0.71(0.37–1.42)

0.351

-

-

Marital status

    

 Single

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Married

1.29(0.64–2.58)

0.472

1.77(0.83–3.75)

0.139

 Widowed/divorced

0.91(0.30–2.72)

0.865

1.29(0.40–4.23)

0.671

Education level

    

 Secondary

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Higher

1.20(0.68–2.11)

0.526

1.28(0.72–2.28)

0.397

Parity

    

 Zero parity

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Para one

0.76(0.34–1.72)

0.532

0.90(0.40–2.02)

0.792

 Multi-parity

1.05(0.51–2.19)

0.884

1.55(0.71–3.38)

0.275

 Grand-multi parity

1.74 (074–4.09)

0.2

3.05(1.15–8.06)

0.025

Life-time sex partners

    

One

Ref

 

Ref

 

 Two or more

1.57(0.79–3.10)

0.195

2.17(1.04–4.54)

0.038

Ever used contraceptives

    

 Yes

Ref

 

Ref

 

 No

0.72(0.46–1.13)

0.156

0.69(0.44–1.08)

0.105

Knows cervical cancer is preventable

    

 Yes

Ref

 

Ref

 

 No

0.51(0.14–1.80)

0.285

0.48(0.14–1.72)

0.261

 I don’t know

0.13(0.05–0.29)

<0.001

0.13(0.06–0.29)

<0.001

Involve spouse in making decision

    

 Yes

Ref

 

Ref

 

 No

3.53(2.11–5.91)

<0.001

3.73(2.22–6.26)

<0.001

Procedures for screening is disgraceful

    

 Yes

Ref

 

Ref

 

 No

1.41(0.64–3.15)

0.392

1.35(0.60–3.05)

0.463

  1. Bolded results are statistically significant at P ≤ 0.05 (Wald P value). OR denotes Odds Ratios and 95%CI denote 95 % confidence intervals