Structural and functional network characteristics and facility delivery among women in rural Ghana

Table 3 Logistic regression odds ratios of association between network characteristics and health facility birth among women with most recent childbirth

	Model	Network characteristics	Health Facility birth
	Model	Network characteristics	AOR (95% CI)
Network structure	1	Network size	1.04 (0.97–1.12)
	2	Number of network members that respondent interacted with	0.98 (0.90–1.07)
	3	Number of network members that respondent lived near	1.07 (0.93–1.25)
Social influence	4	Close relatives approval of facility-based pregnancy and delivery care:
	4	Lower approval Higher approval	1.0 2.16 (1.27–3.68)**
	5	Close friends approval of facility-based pregnancy and delivery care:
	5	Lower approval Higher approval	1.0 1.30 (0.88–1.93)
	6	Number of women respondent know that have gone to a facility for pregnancy-related care:
	6	Fewer number Some Greater number	1.0 1.85 (0.96–3.58) 2.20 (1.21–4.00)**
Instrumental support	7	There was someone to help with daily chores:
	7	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.31 (0.95–1.81)
	8	There was someone to help seek health care:
	8	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.60 (1.10–2.34)**
Emotional support	9	There was someone to listen, if respondent had any problems:
	9	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.07 (0.71–1.63)
	10	There was someone who could understand and support respondent through pregnancy:
	10	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.32 (0.93–1.87)
Informational support	11	There was someone to give respondent advice:
	11	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.66 (1.08–2.54)*
	12	There was someone respondent could turn to for suggestions on dealing with concerns:
	12	Less of the time More of the time	1.0 1.51 (0.99–2.28)*

Note: Regression model for each independent variable controlled for age, education, employment, household wealth, parity, marital status, religion ethnicity, region, and decision-making autonomy. *p ≤ 0.05; **p ≤ 0.01

ISSN: 1471-2393