Table 2

Comparison of stunting status by sex and socio-economic position with unadjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) derived from bivariate logistic regression with girls in the comparison group (coefficients are expressed as odds ratios, p-values for test of trend and Pearson chi-square are also indicated)

Stunted children

p-value

Unadjusted odds ratio

95%CI

Males n(%)

Females n(%)

Mother's education

None

33 (43)

12 (17)

0.01^f

3.00

1.05–8.59*

Stopped in primary

44 (34)

36 (26)

0.18

1.33

0.53–3.38

Completed primary

15 (23)

7 (12)

0.16

2.34

0.69–7.87

Above primary

11 (17)

12 (14)

0.65

1.0

p-value for test of trend

<0.001

0.14

0.11

Father's education

None

12 (40)

5 (19)

0.09^f

1.65

0.45–6.03

Stopped in primary

30 (35)

17 (20)

0.04^f

1.21

0.46–3.20

Completed primary

24 (31)

12 (17)

0.05^f

1.37

0.49–3.87

Stopped in secondary

9 (21)

8 (16)

0.59

0.77

0.23–2.63

Ordinary level or above

16 (25)

11 (15)

0.14

1.0

p-value for test of trend

0.06

0.39

0.37

Index of household wealth

1^st quintile (Poorest)

27 (40)

17 (25)

0.05^f

2.17

0.81–5.81

2^nd quintile

25 (34)

14 (21)

0.05^f

2.44

0.88–6.73

3^rd quintile

21 (35)

11 (15)

0.01^f

2.60

0.90–7.56

4^th quintile

20 (28)

10 (13)

0.02^f

2.73

0.92–8.09

5^th quintile (Least poor)

11 (15)

15 (22)

0.34

1.0

p-value for test of trend

0.01

0.34

0.28

Land ownership

None

9 (27)

7 (18)

0.42

0.77

0.23–2.61

1 acre

19 (25)

20 (22)

0.59

0.57

0.22–1.48

2 acres

28 (41)

16 (18)

0.01^f

1.05

0.41–2.70

3 or 4 acres

26 (30)

11 (18)

0.07^f

1.42

0.52–3.87

5 acres or more

20 (30)

12 (18)

0.08^f

1.0

p-value for trend test

0.64

0.66

0.17

^fFishers exact test; *p < 0.05

Wamani et al. International Journal for Equity in Health 2004 3:9   doi:10.1186/1475-9276-3-9