From: Spatial distribution and predictors of intimate partner violence among women in Nigeria
Variables n = 8968 | Model 0 | Model I | Model II | Model III |
---|---|---|---|---|
aOR[95% CI] | aOR[95% CI] | aOR[95% CI] | ||
Fixed effects results | ||||
Individual-level variables | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Age of respondent |  |  |  |  |
  15–24 |  | RC |  | RC |
  25–34 |  | 1.05[0.90–1.22] |  | 1.12[0.97–1.31] |
  35 and above |  | 0.79**[0.67–0.94] |  | 0.89[0.74–1.06] |
 Women’s level of education |  |  |  |  |
  No education |  | RC |  | RC |
  Primary |  | 0.95[0.79–1.13] |  | 0.99[0.84–1.19] |
  Secondary and above |  | 0.89[0.74–1.06] |  | 1.05[0.87–1.27] |
 Husband/Partner’s level of education |  |  |  |  |
  No education |  | RC |  | RC |
  Primary |  | 1.27*[1.05–1.53] |  | 1.32**[1.09–1.60] |
  Secondary and above |  | 0.93[0.79–1.11] |  | 1.04[0.87–1.24] |
 Marital status |  |  |  |  |
  Currently married |  | RC |  | RC |
  Cohabitating |  | 1.13[0.87–1.48] |  | 1.20[0.91–1.56] |
  Previously married |  | 1.72***[1.35–2.19] |  | 1.73***[1.33–2.25] |
 Working status |  |  |  |  |
  No |  | RC |  | RC |
  Yes |  | 1.30***[1.14–1.47] |  | 1.29***[1.14–1.47] |
 Ethnicity |  |  |  |  |
  Hausa |  | RC |  | RC |
  Yoruba |  | 0.70**[0.54–0.90] |  | 1.39*[0.99–1.94] |
  Igbo |  | 1.09[0.83–1.43] |  | 1.01[0.70–1.47] |
  Others |  | 1.52***[1.25–1.84] |  | 1.10[0.89–1.37] |
 Religion |  |  |  |  |
  Christianity |  | RC |  | RC |
  Islam |  | 0.65***[0.54–0.90] |  | 0.57***[0.47–0.69] |
  Traditionalist and others |  | 0.52*[0.28–0.96] |  | 0.55*[0.30–1.01] |
 Parity |  |  |  |  |
  0 |  | RC |  | RC |
  1–3 |  | 1.49***[1.19–1.85] |  | 1.47**[1.18–1.84] |
  4 and above |  | 1.89***[1.49–2.39] |  | 1.78***[1.40–2.25] |
 Exposure to mass media |  |  |  |  |
  No |  | RC |  | RC |
  Yes |  | 0.99[0.87–1.12] |  | 1.14*[1.00–1.31] |
Household-level | Â | Â | Â | Â |
Place of residence | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Urban |  |  | RC | RC |
 Rural |  |  | 0.88[0.74–1.05] | 0.85[0.72–1.01] |
Wealth index | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Poorest |  |  | RC | RC |
 Poorer |  |  | 0.82*[0.69–0.98] | 0.78**[0.65–0.93] |
 Middle |  |  | 0.76**[0.62–0.92] | 0.71**[0.58–0.87] |
 Richer |  |  | 0.65***[0.52–0.81] | 0.61***[0.48–0.78] |
 Richest |  |  | 0.47***[0.36–0.62] | 0.45***[0.34–0.61] |
Region | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 North Central |  |  | RC | RC |
 North East |  |  | 1.11[0.87–1.41] | 1.50**[1.16–1.92] |
 North West |  |  | 0.31***[0.25–0.39] | 0.49***[0.37–0.64] |
 South East |  |  | 0.94[0.73–1.21] | 0.75[0.51–1.10] |
 South South |  |  | 1.27*[0.99–1.63] | 1.01[0.78–1.31] |
 South West |  |  | 0.33***[0.25–0.42] | 0.25***[0.18–0.34] |
Sex of household head | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Male |  |  | RC | RC |
 Female |  |  | 1.18*[1.02–1.36] | 1.01[0.86–1.20] |
Community literacy level | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Low |  |  | RC | RC |
 Medium |  |  | 1.05[0.87–1.27] | 0.89[0.73–1.09] |
 High |  |  | 1.04[0.82–1.33] | 0.83[0.65–1.07] |
Community socioeconomic status | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Low |  |  | RC | RC |
 Medium |  |  | 1.42*[1.03–1.96] | 1.45*[1.06–2.00] |
 High |  |  | 0.92[0.73–1.15] | 0.97[0.77–1.21] |
Random effects results | ||||
 PSU Variance (95% CI) | 1.23[1.06–1.44] | 1.00[0.84–1.18] | 0.84[0.71–1.01] | 0.81[0.68–0.98] |
 ICC | 0.27 | 0.23 | 0.20 | 0.19 |
 LR test | χ2 = 658.59, p < 0.001 | χ2 = 472.39, p < 0.001 | χ2 = 369.95, p < 0.001 | χ2 = 342.95, p < 0.001 |
 Wald χ2 | Reference | 237.68*** | 318.78*** | 450.12*** |
Model fitness | Â | Â | Â | Â |
 Log-likelihood | − 5581.21 | − 5461.92 | − 5422.82 | − 5348.14 |
 AIC | 11,166.42 | 10,961.84 | 10,879.64 | 10,764.27 |
 Number of clusters | 1383 | 1383 | 1383 | 1383 |