樱花视频

Skip to main content

Table 2 Multivariable associations1 (adjusted odds ratios [AOR]) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs): multivariable associations between social, environmental and intervention exposure factors and consistent condom use with commercial sex clients. Five models (MODEL1-MODEL5) were constructed for each of the five explanatory variables for intervention exposure and each outcome, for 15 models total.

From: A dose-response relationship between exposure to a large-scale HIV preventive intervention and consistent condom use with different sexual partners of female sex workers in southern India

MODEL1

听

OUTCOME: Consistent condom2 use within different sexual partnerships

听听

Condoms used in each occasion of sexual intercourse with clients in the most recent day worked

Consistent condom use with occasional clients

Consistent condom use with most recent repeat client

听

INTERVENTION EXPOSURE

AOR [95% CIs]

P

AOR [95% CIs]

P

AOR [95% CIs]

P

1

Ever contacted by intervention staff (versus not ever contacted)

6.32 [2.76-14.47]

<0.001

2.30 [1.30-4.08]

0.006

1.07 [0.34-3.33]

0.993

2

Had a condom demonstration by intervention staff (versus never had a condom demonstration)

4.89 [2.57-9.30]

<0.001

2.30 [1.30-4.07]

0.009

0.88 [0.29-2.66]

0.812

3

Duration since first contacted by intervention staff

Has not been contacted

Less than one year (greater than zero)

One year

Two-three years

Test for trends

1.0 (ref)

5.80 [2.54-13.29]

5.38 [2.06-14.06]

11.76 [3.80 -36.33]

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

0.001

1.0 (ref)

1.77 [0.98-3.20]

2.72 [1.33-5.56]

3.71 [1.55-8.87]

0.095

0.011

0.005

0.006

1.0 (ref)

0.65 [0.19-2.19]

1.53 [0.51-4.65]

2.55 [0.79-8.23]

0.487

0.449

0.118

/

4

Number of times contacted by intervention staff

Zero

Five or fewer (greater than zero)

Greater than five

Test for trends

1.0 (ref)

5.10 [2.28 -11.43]

7.66 [2.27-25.87]

<0.001

0.010

0.047

1.0 (ref)

2.65 [1.42-4.96]

1.99 [0.78-5.08]

0.002

0.153

/

1.0 (ref)

1.12 [0.36-3.51]

0.87 [0.21-3.60]

0.847

0.844

/

5

Number of condom demos by staff seen past month

Zero

One

Two

Three or greater

Test for trends

1.0 (ref)

3.41 [1.69-6.86]

7.76 [3.08-19.54]

4.88 [2.17-10.97]

<0.001

<0.001

<0.001

0.004

1.0 (ref)

1.48 [0.72-3.04]

4.59 [2.26-9.29]

2.13 [1.14-3.97]

0.283

<0.001

0.018

0.026

1.0 (ref)

1.08 [0.42-2.76]

1.97 [0.80-4.87]

0.70 [0.21-2.35]

0.875

0.143

0.561

/

  1. 1 Models were all adjusted for variables that were included a priori and variables that were significantly associated with each outcome on the p<0.10-level in bivariate analysis. For all three outcomes of condom use, a priori variables included typology of sex work (place of solicitation) and district; for condoms used in each occasion of sexual intercourse with clients in the most recent day worked, models were also adjusted by marital status, age and age at first sex; for condom use with occasional clients, models were also adjusted by age, marital status, literacy, age at first sex work; for condom use with most recent repeat client, models were also adjusted by education.
  2. 2 Consistent condom use is defined as reporting always (100%) using condoms.
  3. / Test for trend not significant in bivariate analysis, and was not tested in multivariable models.
Back to article page

樱花视频

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us