United States aid policy and induced abortion in sub-Saharan Africa
Eran Bendavid, Patrick Avila & Grant Miller
Volume 89, Number 12, December 2011, 873-880C
Table 3. Unadjusted and adjusted estimates of abortion risk associated with the Mexico City Policy
| Parameter | Unadjusteda |
Adjusted for woman characteristicsb |
Adjusted for woman and country characteristicsc |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| Risk of abortion when the policy was active in highly exposed countriesd | 2.73 | 1.95–3.82 | 2.70 | 1.91–3.82 | 2.55 | 1.76–3.71 | ||
| Living in urban setting | – | – | 0.75 | 0.64–0.88 | 0.74 | 0.63–0.87 | ||
| Ever attended school | – | – | 1.95 | 1.30–2.92 | 1.94 | 1.29–2.91 | ||
| Woman’s age (per additional year) | – | – | 1.02 | 1.00–1.04 | 1.02 | 1.00–1.04 | ||
| Married at time of abortion | – | – | 1.82 | 1.28–2.60 | 1.80 | 1.27–2.56 | ||
| Use of modern contraceptives (per additional 1% in country–year) | – | – | – | – | 0.95 | 0.90–0.99 | ||
| Funding for family planning and reproductive health from non-US OECD countries (per each additional US dollar per person) | – | – | – | – | 0.97 | 0.82–1.15 | ||
CI, confidence interval; OECD, Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development; OR, odds ratio; US, United States.
a Includes country and year fixed effects only.
b Includes controls for age, marital status at the time of observation, place of residence and educational attainment in addition to country and year fixed effects.
c Includes controls for prevalence of modern contraceptive use in country and non-US support for family planning and reproductive health in addition to woman characteristics and country and year fixed effects only.
d Odds ratio of having an induced abortion among women living in highly exposed countries when the Mexico City Policy was active compared with the previous period and with abortion odds among women living in less exposed countries during the entire period.