Skip to main content

Table 4 Differences in correlates of HR-HPV infection, comparing urban to rural women in Mali (n=414)

From: Differences in patterns of high-risk human papillomavirus infection between urban and rural low-resource settings: cross-sectional findings from Mali

 

Urban prevalence

Rural prevalence

p**

Age

   

 15-24

17% (8/47)

20% (10/50)

0.52

 25-34

12% (8/68)

27% (15/56)

 35-44

11% (4/37)

19% (12/64)

 45-54

6% (2/31)

31% (9/29)

 55-65

11% (2/19)

18% (2/11)

Can read

14% (8/59)

27% (15/55)

0.90

 Cannot read

11% (16/143)

22% (34/156)

 

Attended school

14% (11/77)

25% (18/72)

0.38

 Did not attend school

10% (13/125)

22% (31/139)

 

Work outside home

11% (10/87)

27% (17/64)

0.45

 No

12% (13/108)

20% (25/126)

 

Age first intercourse

   

 10-14

26% (9/34)

25% (15/59)

0.07

 15-32

9%* (14/138)

22% (33/150)

 

Household income/mo.

  

0.28

 <25 K CFA (<$50)

6% (3/50)

29% (11/38)

 

 25 K-49,999 CFA ($50-100)

13% (8/63)

21% (19/92)

 

 50 K-99,999 CFA ($100-200)

10% (6/58)

29% (16/56)

 

 100 K+ CFA ($200+)

20% (4/20)

20% (2/10)

 

Married

9% (12/139)

24% (45/186)

0.09

 No

19%* (12/62)

19% (4/21)

 

Polygamy

9% (7/75)

24% (25/108)

0.69

 No

12% (13/108)

23% (22/92)

 

Ever pregnant

12% (21/174)

24% (46/194)

0.76

 No

11% (3/27)

18% (3/17)

 

No. pregnancies

  

0.53

 0

11% (3/27)

18% (3/17)

 

 1-5

17% (17/102)

23% (23/100)

 

 6-8

7% (3/45)

22% (15/67)

 

 9-10

5% (1/21)

28% (5/18)

 

 >11

0% (0/7)

30% (3/10)

 

Ever used condom

26% (6/23)

15% (4/26)

0.03

 No

11%* (18/168)

26% (43/168)

 
  1. HR-HPV: high-risk HPV.
  2. *Within residence setting, significantly different from first listed category, using Pearson’s chi-square test.
  3. ** p-value for difference in relationship between characteristic and HR-HPV status between areas, using logistic regression.