Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T00:54:40.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

AREA VARIATIONS IN USE OF MODERN CONTRACEPTION IN RURAL BANGLADESH: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 1999

NASHID KAMAL ,
ANDREW SLOGGETT  and
JOHN G. CLELAND
NASHID KAMAL
Affiliation:
Department of Population–Environment, Independent University, Bangladesh (IUB), Baridhara, Dhaka 1212, Bangladesh
ANDREW SLOGGETT
Affiliation:
Centre for Population Studies, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 99 Gower Street, London WC1E 6AZ
JOHN G. CLELAND
Affiliation:
Centre for Population Studies, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 99 Gower Street, London WC1E 6AZ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study in Bangladesh found that inter-cluster variation in the use of modern reversible methods of contraception was significantly attributable to the educational levels of the female family planning workers working in the clusters. Women belonging to clusters served by educated workers had a higher probability of being contraceptive users than those whose workers had only completed primary education. At the household level, important determinants of use were socioeconomic status and religion. At the individual level, the woman being the wife of the household head and having some education were positively related to her being a user. The model also found that inter-household variation was significantly greater than inter-cluster variation. Finally, the study concludes that after controlling for various covariates at all three levels, the clusters do not have significantly different levels of use of modern reversible methods of contraception. There are, however, some special areas where contraceptive use is dramatically low, and these contribute significantly to the observed inter-cluster variation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Biosocial Science , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , July 1999 , pp. 327 - 341
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)