Can microcredit help improve the health of poor women? Some findings from a cross-sectional study in Kerala, India

Table 9 Models for Limits in Activities in Daily Living (ADL). Binomial logistic regression: odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals and goodness of fit statistics^a

Dependent variable: Limits in ADL (yes, n = 377, no, n = 551)	M0	M1	M2	M3
*Socioeconomic characteristics and caste*
Education (ref = high school+) Primary		1.31 [0.89–1.92]	1.31 [0.89–1.92]	1.26 [0.83–1.91]
No education		1.83 [1.24–2.70]	1.82 [1.23–2.71]	1.71 [1.12–2.62]
Employment (ref = not engaged) Engaged		0.64 [0.46–0.91]	0.65 [0.46–0.91]	0.68 [0.47–0.98]
Landholdings (ref = more than 50 cents) 50 cents or less		1.38 [0.96–1.98]	1.37 [0.95–1.98]	1.22 [0.82–1.80]
Caste of head (ref = forward) OBC		0.80 [0.54–1.19]	0.80 [0.54–1.19]	0.81 [0.53–1.25]
SC/ST		0.71 [0.47–1.06]	0.71 [0.47–1.07]	0.72 [0.46–1.12]
*SHG participation*
SHG (ref = not member) Early joiner (> 2 years)	0.79 [0.53–1.18]		0.97 [0.62–1.50]	0.91 [0.56–1.46]
Late joiner (< = 2 years)	0.94 [0.70–1.25]		1.14 [0.83–1.57]	1.29 [0.91–1.81]
*Health determinants*
Exclusion (ref = no exclusion) Exclusion				2.02 [1.47–2.78]
Health risks (ref = no risks) At least one risk				5.60 [3.84–8.17]
Decision-making (ref = female/joint) Male				2.23 [1.41–3.52]
Chi square (df) -2 log likelihood	1.36 (2) 1252.3	129.5(9)*** 1124.1	130.5(11)*** 1123.1	252.5(14)*** 1001.1
Deviation		2.0(2)		244.0(3)***

^a Notes: Models are adjusted for age and women's household position. Results in bold are statistically significant, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001,
OBC = Other Backward Caste, SC/ST = Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe.

ISSN: 1475-9276