Skip to main content

Table 3 Log-regression of the HBM, TPB and TCSB predicting CCS intention

From: A comparison of behavioural models explaining cervical cancer screening uptake

 

OR

95 CI

P value

OR

95 CI

P value

OR

95 CI

P value

OR

95 CI

P value

Health insurance

1.85

1.21–2.84

0.004

1.79

1.16–2.77

0.008

1.85

1.20–2.86

0.005

1.98

1.26–3.09

0.003

Healthcare-expenditure decision making

2.27

1.48–3.47

 < 0.001

2.05

1.31–3.20

0.002

2.02

1.28–3.17

0.002

1.82

1.15–2.87

0.009

Accessibility to screening centre

2.97

1.84–4.82

 < 0.001

2.8

1.71–4.60

 < 0.001

2.88

1.76–4.69

 < 0.001

2.74

1.66–4.51

 < 0.001

Health literacy

1.85

1.22–2.83

0.004

1.57

1.01–2.44

0.043

1.57

1.01–2.45

0.04

1.6

1.02–2.51

0.04

Knowledge about screening test

3.76

1.65–8.58

0.002

3.12

1.33–7.30

0.009

3.38

1.46–7.81

0.004

3.37

1.45–7.82

0.005

Perceived susceptibility

   

1.03

1.91–1.17

0.55

      

Perceived severity

   

0.91

0.80–1.05

0.23

      

Perceived benefits

   

1.21

1.07–1.36

0.002

      

Perceived barriers

   

0.95

0.92–0.98

0.006

      

Perceived self-efficacy

   

0.98

0.91–1.05

0.596

      

Attitude

      

0.88

0.81–0.96

0.007

   

Perceived subjective norm

      

0.97

0.88–1.07

0.59

   

Perceived behavioural control

      

1

0.96–1.04

0.94

   

Affect

         

0.84

0.75–0.94

0.003

Utility

         

1.2

1.07–1.35

0.002

Subjective norm

         

0.97

0.89–1.06

0.58

Habit

         

0.78

0.53–1.15

0.21

  1. Model 1: R2 = 0.158,R2(adj) = 0.150, Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ2 = 1.694, df = 5, p = 0.89
  2. Model 2: R2 = 0.192,R2(adj) = 0.178, Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ2 = 4.61, df = 8, p = 0.79
  3. Model 3: R2 = 0.182, R2 (adj) = 0.171, Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ2 = 8.6 df = 8, p = 0.37
  4. Model 4: R2 = 0.201, R2 (adj) = 0.188, Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: χ2 = 15.49, df = 8, p = 0.05