Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Baseline levels of service utilisation by subgroups across study arms

From: Who benefits from increased service utilisation? Examining the distributional effects of payment for performance in Tanzania

Outcome variable/ subgrouping variable Intervention arm Comparison arm
Yes No Gap Yes No Gap
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
OUTCOME 1: Institutional deliveries (n = 1376) (n = 1468)
Predisposing factors
  Married woman (%) 84.8 84.7 0.1 86.7 87.0 −0.3
  Woman below median age of 25 years/younger (%) 85.4 84.2 1.2 87.3 86.4 0.9
  Woman with primary education/above (%) 85.9 80.4 5.5b 89.8 74.8 15.0a
  Woman doing farming for occupation (%) 79.1 89.6 −10.5a 82.6 91.9 −9.3a
  Muslim woman (%) 84.7 85.4 −0.7 87.5 85.5 2.0
  Woman with one birth/parity 1 (%) 90.1 82.3 7.8a 92.5 84.3 8.2a
  Household size below the median size of 5 members (%) 87.2 82.3 4.9b 87.3 86.4 0.9
Enabling factors
  Woman with any health insurance (%) 89.9 84.3 5.6c 83.3 87.1 −3.8
  Household with poorest wealth status (Tercile 1) (%) 83.3 91.7 −8.4a 80.5 94.2 −13.7a
  Household with middle wealth status (Tercile 2) (%) 80.8 91.7 −10.9a 84.2 94.2 −10.0a
  Household in rural district (%) 83.9 88.0 −4.1 85.8 92.3 −6.5c
OUTCOME 2: Uptake of IPT2 (n = 1029) (n = 1.199)
Predisposing factors
  Married woman (%) 51.0 47.0 4.0 59.3 51.7 7.6b
  Woman below median age of 25 years/younger (%) 48.7 51.1 −2.4 55.5 57.6 −2.1
  Woman with primary education/above (%) 50.9 45.1 5.8 57.5 52.9 4.6
  Woman doing farming for occupation (%) 48.5 51.1 −2.6 56.3 56.9 −0.6
  Muslim woman (%) 49.9 50.4 −0.5 58.2 53.5 4.7
  Woman with one birth/parity 1 (%) 48.0 50.8 −2.8 57.9 56.1 1.8
  Household size below the median size of 5 members (%) 50.7 49.1 1.6 55.3 57.9 −2.6
Enabling factors
  Woman with any health insurance (%) 45.6 50.4 −4.8 61.6 56.1 5.5
  Household with poorest wealth status (Tercile 1) (%) 47.8 49.6 −1.8 59.7 54.2 5.5
  Household with middle wealth status (Tercile 2) (%) 52.6 49.6 3.0 56.9 54.2 2.7
  Household in rural district (%) 50.4 48.1 2.3 56.7 56.4 0.3
  1. We used a t-test to test the null hypothesis of a gap (column 3 and 6) equals to zero; Tercile 3 (least poor) was the reference category for Tercile 1 and 2; adenotes significance at 1%, bat 5%, and cat 10% level