Skip to main content

Table 2 Association between exposure to interparental violence and intimate partner violence among women in Papua New Guinea

From: Exposure to interparental violence and intimate partner violence among women in Papua New Guinea

Variable

Model O

Model I cOR [95% CI]

Model II aOR [95% CI]

Model III aOR [95% CI]

Model IV aOR [95% CI]

Fixed effects results

Exposed to interparental violence

No

 

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Yes

 

1.53** [1.17, 2.00]

1.46** [1.13, 1.87]

1.52** [1.16, 1.98]

1.45** [1.13, 1.86]

Women’s age (years)

15–24

  

1.00

 

1.00

22–34

  

1.12 [0.67, 1.88]

 

1.14 [0.68, 1.89]

35–49

  

0.69 [0.39, 1.24]

 

0.69 [0.39, 1.23]

Women’s educational level

No education

  

1.00

 

1.00

Primary

  

1.28 [0.79, 2.09]

 

1.32 [0.79, 2.22]

Secondary or higher

  

1.25 [0.48, 3.23]

 

1.29 [0.47, 3.53]

Marital status

Married

  

1.00

 

1.00

Cohabiting

  

1.06 [0.81, 1.41]

 

1.05 [0.79, 1.40]

Current working status

No

  

1.00

 

1.00

Yes

  

1.17 [0.91, 1.49]

 

1.18 [0.92, 1.51]

Parity

Zero birth

  

1.00

 

1.00

1 birth

  

1.01 [0.61, 1.68]

 

1.02 [0.62, 1.71]

2 births

  

0.60 [0.30, 1.21]

 

0.61 [0.31, 1.23]

3 births

  

0.73 [0.43, 1.24]

 

0.74 [0.44, 1.25]

4 or more births

  

0.77 [0.49, 1.21]

 

0.80 [0.51, 1.25]

Exposure to mass media

None

  

1.00

 

1.00

One

  

1.12 [0.80, 1.57]

 

1.07 [0.77, 1.50]

Two or more

  

1.38 [0.93, 2.05]

 

1.28 [0.87, 1.88]

Wealth index

Poorest

  

1.00

 

1.00

Poorer

  

0.97 [0.67, 1.40]

 

0.95 [0.66, 1.38]

Middle

  

1.09 [0.74, 1.61]

 

1.06 [0.72, 1.56]

Richer

  

1.01 [0.67, 1.54]

 

0.90 [0.57, 1.41]

Richest

  

0.94 [0.55, 1.60]

 

0.68 [0.37, 1.25]

Place of residence

Urban

   

1.00

1.00

Rural

   

0.56** [0.40, 0.78]

0.50** [0.32, 0.80]

Region

Southern Region

   

1.00

1.00

Highlands Region

   

1.37* [1.02, 1.83]

1.44* [1.06, 1.96]

Momase Region

   

1.15 [0.85, 1.56]

1.18 [0.86, 1.61]

Islands Region

   

1.03 [0.76, 1.38]

1.03 [0.75, 1.40]

Community literacy level

Low

   

1.00

1.00

Medium

   

1.22 [0.93, 1.60]

1.10 [0.80, 1.51]

High

   

1.14 [0.82, 1.61]

1.02 [0.67, 1.56]

Community socioeconomic status

Low

   

1.00

1.00

Medium

   

1.38 [0.86, 2.19]

1.45 [0.90, 2.35]

High

   

1.28 [1.00, 1.63]

1.35 [0.99, 1.86]

Random effects results

PSU variance (95% CI)

0.830 [0.609–1.130]

0.806 [0.590–1.103]

0.795 [0.558–1.132]

0.752 [0.546, 1.035]

0.777 [0.550–1.098]

ICC

0.201

0.197

0.194

0.186

0.191

Wald chi-square

Reference

9.64 (0.002)

39.27 (0.002)

35.90 (< 0.001}

57.42 (< 0.001)

Model fitness

Log-likelihood

−2112.8019

−2100.4571

−2063.7284

−2088.4683

−2053.533

BIC

4241.932

4225.406

4282.572

4266.74

4327.492

N

3512

3512

3512

3512

3512

Number of clusters

750

750

750

750

750

  1. aOR adjusted odds ratios, cOR Crude odds ratio, CI Confidence interval, *p< 0.05, **p< 0.01; 1.00 Reference category; PSU Primary Sampling Unit, ICC Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient, LR Test Likelihood ratio Test, AIC Akaike’s Information Criterion; N Total sample