The average age of participants was 28.9 years with a standard deviation of 7.5 years, and 41.5% fell within the 25–34 age range. A significant portion (48.2%) had no formal education, while the majorities (93.4%) were married. Predominantly, participants hailed from the Gofa zone (93.3%) and rural areas (83.3%). Furthermore, 84% resided in rural regions. In terms of wealth distribution, approximately 20.5%, 21.1%, and 20.6% of participants were categorized into the poorest, poorer, and middle wealth quintiles respectively. Housewives comprised the largest occupational group, accounting for 72% of participants. Additional socio-demographic details can be found in Table 1.
Regarding knowledge of NCD risk factors, only 34.6% of the study participants had good knowledge; but the vast majority had poor knowledge.
Factors association with non-communicable diseases risk factors
In logistic regression models, being overweight and/or obese showed significant associations with several factors including age, marital status, residence, zone, educational status, wealth index, occupational status, family size, receiving advice from health professionals, family history of NCDs, and membership in a functional WDA. Similarly, variables such as age, marital status, residence, zone, educational status, wealth index, occupational status, family size, receiving advice from health professionals, family history of NCDs, social support for preventing NCD risk factors, and membership in a functional WDA were significantly associated with raised blood pressure during bivariate analysis. Raised fasting blood glucose was significantly associated with several factors including age, marital status, zone, educational status, wealth index, occupational status, family size, receiving advice from health professionals, family history of NCDs and membership in a functional WDA during bivariate analysis. Raised total cholesterol levels were significantly associated with age, marital status, residence, zone, educational status, wealth index, occupational status, family size, receiving advice from health professionals, family history of NCDs, and membership in a functional WDA during bivariate analysis. Variables with a p-value of less than 0.25 in binary logistic regression were included in a multivariable logistic regression model to control for confounding effects. Detailed factors associated with biological risk factors are presented in Tables 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
The likelihood of overweight and/or obesity was higher among women aged 25–34 years (AOR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.28, 1.41) and those aged > 35 years (AOR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.13, 1.26) compared to those aged 15–24 years. Literate women, particularly those with primary (AOR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.17, 1.28) and secondary school education (AOR: 1.63, 95% CI 1.55, 1.72), were more likely to be overweight and/or obese compared to illiterate women. Married (AOR: 2.62, 95% CI 2.21, 3.10) and single women (AOR: 1.40, 95% CI 1.23, 1.60) had higher odds of being overweight and/or obese compared to widowed/divorced women. Residents of the Gofa zone had nearly twice the likelihood of being overweight and/or obese (AOR: 1.73, 95% CI 1.60, 1.88) compared to Basketo residents. However, urban residents (AOR: 0.85, 95% CI 0.81, 0.88) had lower odds of being overweight and/or obese compared to rural. Women from households with lower wealth statuses were less likely to be overweight and/or obese compared to the wealthiest households.
Housewives (AOR: 7.83, 95% CI 7.02, 8.74), merchants (AOR: 6.28, 95% CI 5.61, 7.03), and government employees (AOR: 6.37, 95% CI 5.63, 7.21) had significantly higher odds of being overweight and/or obese compared to other occupations such as maid servants, daily laborers and students. Women from smaller households (family size ≤ 4) were less likely to be overweight and/or obese (AOR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.74, 0.81) compared to those from larger households. Lack of health professional advice had more than double risk of overweight and/or obesity (AOR: 2.53, 95% CI 2.44, 2.63), as did non-membership in functional WDA (AOR: 1.59, 95% CI 1.54, 1.65). Conversely, women without a family history of NCDs were less likely to be overweight and/or obese (AOR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.67, 0.75) compared to those with a family history.
Table 3
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression of overweight and/or obesity and independent variables among reproductive-age women in Gofa and Basketo zones, South Ethiopia
Candidate Variables | Overweight and/or obesity |
| COR (95%CI) | P-value | AOR (95%CI) | P-value |
Age | | | | |
15–24 | 1 | | 1 | |
25–34 | 1.62 (1.56, 1.68) | < .001 | 1.34 (1.28, 1.41) | < .001* |
≥ 35 | 1.45 (1.39, 1.51) | < .001 | 1.19 (1.13, 1.26) | < .001* |
Educational status | | | | |
Illiterate | 1 | | 1 | |
Able to read and write | 3.98 (3.80, 4.16) | < .001 | 4.67 (4.45, 4.90) | < .001* |
Primary education | 0.99 (0.95, 1.03) | .581 | 1.23 (1.17, 1.28) | < .001* |
Secondary education and above | 1.07 (1.02, 1.12) | .002 | 1.63 (1.55, 1.72) | < .001* |
Marital status | | | | |
Married | 1.62(1.43, 1.84) | < .001 | 2.62 (2.21, 3.10) | < .001* |
Single | 0.96(0.83, 1.12) | .632 | 1.40 (1.23, 1.60) | < .001* |
Widowed/Divorced | 1 | | 1 | |
Residence | | | | |
Urban | 1.41(1.36, 1.47) | < .001 | 0.85 (0.81, 0.88) | < .001* |
Rural | 1 | | 1 | |
Zone | | | | |
Gofa | 1.65(1.54, 1.78) | < .001 | 1.73 (1.60, 1.88) | < .001* |
Basketo | 1 | | 1 | |
Wealth index | | | | |
Poorest | 0.59(0.57, 0.62) | < .001 | 0.84 (0.80, 0.89) | < .001* |
Poorer | 0.27(0.26, 0.29) | < .001 | 0.30 (0.29, 0.32) | < .001* |
Middle | 0.61(0.58, 0.63) | < .001 | 0.75 (0.71, 0.78) | < .001* |
Richer | 0.43(0.41, 0.45) | < .001 | 0.38 (0.36, 0.40) | < .001* |
Richest | 1 | | 1 | |
Occupational status | | | | |
1. Housewife | 6.03(5.48, 6.65) | < .001 | 7.83 (7.02, 8.74) | < .001* |
2. Merchant | 5.33(4.80, 5.92) | < .001 | 6.28 (5.61, 7.03) | < .001* |
3. Government employee | 8.48(7.57, 9.51) | < .001 | 6.37 (5.63, 7.21) | < .001* |
4. Other | 1 | | 1 | |
Family size | | | | |
1. ≤ 4 | 0.71(0.69, 0.74) | < .001 | 0.77 (0.74, 0.81) | < .001* |
2. > 4 | 1 | | 1 | |
Getting advice from health professionals | | | | |
1. No | 2.04(1.97, 2.10) | | 2.53 (2.44, 2.63) | < .001* |
2. Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Family history of NCDs | | | | |
1. No | 0.59(0.56, 0.62) | < .001 | 0.71 (0.67, 0.75) | < .001* |
2. Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Is your WDA functional? | | | | |
1. No | 1.74(1.68, 1.80) | < .001 | 1.59 (1.54, 1.65) | < .001* |
2. Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
COR-Crude Odds Ratio: odds ratio by bivariate analysis. 95% CI: confidence interval at the 95% level.
AOR-Adjusted OR: odds ratio by multiple logistic regression 1: Referent category
Women aged 15–24 years (AOR: 0.41, 95% CI 0.39, 0.44) and 25–34 years (AOR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.65, 0.70) had lower odds of raised blood pressure compared to those aged ≥ 35 years. Illiterate women (AOR: 2.64, 95% CI 2.48, 2.82), those able to read and write (AOR: 3.07, 95% CI 2.85, 3.32), and those with primary education (AOR: 2.58, 95% CI 2.41, 2.75) were approximately three times more likely to have raised blood pressure compared to those with secondary education. Married (AOR: 1.89, 95% CI 1.66, 2.16) and single women (AOR: 7.56, 95% CI 6.47, 8.82) faced higher risk of raised blood pressure compared to widowed/divorced women. Urban residents had about half the risk of raised blood pressure (AOR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.53, 0.59) compared to rural residents.
Individuals from poorer (AOR: 1.08, 95% CI 1.02, 1.14) and middle wealth quartiles (AOR: 1.56, 95% CI 1.48, 1.64) were more likely to have raised blood pressure, whereas those from the poorest (AOR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.78, 0.88) and richer households (AOR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.59, 0.66) were less likely. Housewives (AOR: 1.56, 95% CI 1.45, 1.69), merchants (AOR: 2.98, 95% CI 2.75, 3.23), and government employees (AOR: 4.11, 95% CI 3.69, 4.54) faced higher risk compared to other occupations. Participants from smaller households (family size ≤ 4) had a 31% lower risk (AOR: 0.69, 95% CI 0.66, 0.72) compared to those with larger families. Lack of health professional advice increased the likelihood of raised blood pressure (AOR: 1.58, 95% CI 1.52, 1.64), as did non-membership in functional WDA (AOR: 1.53, 95% CI 1.47, 1.59). Individuals without a family history of NCDs (AOR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.62, 0.71) and lack of social support 0.95(0.92, 0.99) had lower risk of raised blood pressure.
Table 4
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression of raised blood pressure and independent variables among reproductive-age women in Gofa and Basketo zones, South Ethiopia
Candidate Variables | Raised Blood Pressure |
| COR (95%CI) | P-value | AOR (95%CI) | P-value |
Age | | | | |
15–24 | 0.29(.28, 0.31) | < .001 | 0.41 (0.39, 0.44) | < .001* |
25–34 | 0.67(0.64, 0.69) | < .001 | 0.67 (0.65, 0.70) | < .001* |
≥ 35 | 1 | | 1 | |
Educational status | | | | |
Illiterate | 2.46(2.34, 2.59) | < .001 | 2.64 (2.48, 2.82) | < .001* |
Able to read and write | 2.50(2.35, 2.67) | < .001 | 3.07 (2.85, 3.32) | < .001* |
Primary education | 1.93(1.83, 2.04) | < .001 | 2.58 (2.41, 2.75) | < .001* |
Secondary education and above | 1 | | 1 | |
Marital status | | | | |
Married | 1.39(1.22, 1.57) | < .001 | 1.89 (1.66, 2.16) | < .001* |
Single | 1.94 (1.68, 2.24) | < .001 | 7.56 (6.47, 8.82) | < .001* |
Widowed/Divorced | 1 | | 1 | |
Residence | | | | |
Urban | 0.65(0.62, 0.69) | < .001 | 0.56 (0.53, 0.59) | < .001* |
Rural | 1 | | 1 | |
Zone | | | | |
Gofa | 0.80(0.76, 0.85) | < .001 | 0.97 (0.91, 1.03) | .346 |
Basketo | 1 | | 1 | |
Wealth index | | | | |
Poorest | 0.62(0.58, 0.65) | < .001 | 0.83 (0.78, 0.88) | < .001* |
Poorer | 0.95(0.90, 0.99) | .039 | 1.08(1.02, 1.14) | .006* |
Middle | 1.45(1.38, 1.53) | < .001 | 1.56 (1.48, 1.64) | < .001* |
Richer | 0.73(0.69, 0.77) | < .001 | 0.62 (0.59, 0.66) | < .001* |
Richest | 1 | | 1 | |
Occupational status | | | | |
Housewife | 1.72(1.61, 1.84) | < .001 | 1.56 (1.45, 1.69) | < .001* |
Merchant | 3.35(3.12, 3.60) | < .001 | 2.98 (2.75, 3.23) | < .001* |
Government employee | 2.75(2.51, 3.01) | < .001 | 4.11 (3.69, 4.54) | < .001* |
Other | 1 | | 1 | |
Family size | | | | |
≤ 4 | 0.49(0.47, 0.51) | < .001 | 0.69 (0.66, 0.72) | < .001* |
> 4 | 1 | | 1 | |
Getting advice from health professionals | | | | |
No | 1.45(1.41, 1.50) | < .001 | 1.58 (1.52, 1.64) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Family history of NCDs | | | | |
No | 0.58(0.55, 0.61) | < .001 | 0.66 (0.62, 0.71) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Social support to prevent NCD risk factors | | | | |
No | 1.07(1.03, 1.10) | < .001 | 0.95(0.92, 0.99) | .009* |
Yes | 1 | | | |
Is your WDA functional? | | | | |
No | 1.33(1.29, 1.38) | < .001 | 1.53 (1.47, 1.59) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
COR-Crude Odds Ratio: odds ratio by bivariate analysis. 95% CI: confidence interval at the 95% level.
AOR-Adjusted OR: odds ratio by multiple logistic regression 1: Referent category
Women aged 15–24 years (AOR: 0.26, 95% CI 0.23, 0.31) and 25–34 years (AOR: 0.19, 95% CI 0.18, 0.21) had lower odds of raised fasting blood glucose compared to those aged ≥ 35 years. However, women who were able to read and write (AOR: 19.86, 95% CI 17.41, 22.64), illiterate (AOR: 3.36, 95% CI 3.00, 3.75), and had primary school education (AOR: 2.90, 95% CI 2.55, 3.31) were at significantly higher risk compared to those with secondary education. Women from the Gofa zone were about half as likely to have raised blood glucose (AOR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.46, 0.59) compared to Basketo residents, and married women were less likely to have raised blood glucose (AOR: 0.15, 95% CI 0.13, 0.17) compared to widowed or divorced. Participants from smaller households (family size ≤ 4) had a 35% lower risk (AOR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.59, 0.71) compared to those with larger families. Merchants (AOR: 57.45, 95% CI 42.90, 76.92), government employees (AOR: 11.07, 95% CI 5.17, 15.02), and housewives (AOR: 5.23, 95% CI 3.92, 6.98) had higher odds of raised fasting blood glucose compared to other occupations. Conversely, individuals from the poorer (AOR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.46, 0.54), middle (AOR: 0.12, 95% CI 0.11, 0.14), and richer wealth quartiles (AOR: 0.59, 95% CI 0.54, 0.64) were less likely to have raised fasting blood glucose compared to the richest. Lack of advice from health professionals increased the likelihood (AOR: 8.33, 95% CI 7.75, 8.95), as did non-membership in functional WDA (AOR: 2.59, 95% CI 2.38, 2.81).
Table 5
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression of raised fasting blood glucose and independent variables among reproductive-age women in Gofa and Basketo zones, South Ethiopia
Candidate Variables | Raised Fasting blood glucose |
| COR (95%CI) | P-value | AOR (95%CI) | P-value |
Age | | | | |
15–24 | 0.13(0.12, 0.14) | < .001 | 0.26 (0.23, 0.31) | < .001* |
25–34 | 0.20(0.19, 0.22) | < .001 | 0.19 (0.18, 0.21) | < .001* |
≥ 35 | 1 | | 1 | |
Educational status | | | | |
Illiterate | 1.71(1.58, 1.85) | < .001 | 3.36 (3.00, 3.75) | < .001* |
Able to read and write | 5.74(5.27, 6.25) | < .001 | 19.86 (17.41, 22.64) | < .001* |
Primary education | 0.85(0.77, 0.93) | .001 | 2.90 (2.55, 3.31) | < .001* |
Secondary education and above | 1 | | 1 | |
Marital status | | | | |
Married | 0.23(.20, .25) | < .001 | 0.15 (0.13, 0.17) | < .001* |
Single | 0.00 (.00.) | .969 | (.00, .00) | .960 |
Widowed/Divorced | 1 | | 1 | |
Zone | | | | |
Gofa | 0.60(0.55, 0.66) | < .001 | 0.52 (0.46, 0.59) | < .001* |
Basketo | 1 | | 1 | |
Wealth index | | | | |
Poorest | 0.00 (0.00, 4.68) | .936 | (.00, .00) | .928 |
Poorer | 0.44(0.41, 0.47) | < .001 | 0.50 (0.46, 0.54) | < .001* |
Middle | 0.14(0.13, 0 .16) | < .001 | 0.12 (0.11, 0.14) | < .001* |
Richer | 0.53(0.49, 0.57) | < .001 | 0.59 (0.54, 0.64) | < .001* |
Richest | 1 | | 1 | |
Occupational status | | | | |
Housewife | 7.79(6.03, 10.08) | < .001 | 5.23 (3.92, 6.98) | < .001* |
Merchant | 36.94(28.53, 47.81) | < .001 | 57.45 (42.90, 76.92) | < .001* |
Government employee | 23.01(17.56, 30.15) | < .001 | 11.07 (5.17, 15.02) | < .001* |
Other | 1 | | 1 | |
Family size | | | | |
≤ 4 | 0.32(.30, .34) | < .001 | 0.65 (0.59, 0.71) | < .001* |
> 4 | 1 | | 1 | |
Getting advice from health professionals | | | | |
No | 5.09(4.81, 5.38) | < .001 | 8.33 (7.75, 8.95) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Family history of NCDs | | | | |
No | 0.35(.32, .37) | < .001 | 0.96 (0.86, 1.07) | .432 |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Is your WDA functional? | | | | |
No | 1.89(1.78, 2.02) | < .001 | 2.59 (2.38, 2.81) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
COR-Crude Odds Ratio: odds ratio by bivariate analysis. 95% CI: confidence interval at the 95% level.
AOR-Adjusted OR: odds ratio by multiple logistic regression 1: Referent category
Women aged 15–24 years (AOR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.47, 0.53) and 25–34 years (AOR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.73, 0.81) had half and three-quarters lower odds of raised total cholesterol, respectively, compared to women aged ≥ 35 years. Those with primary (AOR: 1.07, 95% CI 1.02, 1.13) and secondary school education (AOR: 1.09, 95% CI 1.02, 1.16) were more likely to have raised total cholesterol compared to illiterate women, while those who could read and write (AOR: 0.68, 95% CI 0.62, 0.74) were less likely to have raised total cholesterol. Married women (AOR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.73, 0.92) had 18% lower likelihood of raised total cholesterol compared to Widowed/divorced. Residents of the Gofa area were four times more likely to have raised total cholesterol (AOR: 3.90, 95% CI 3.41, 4.47) compared to Basketo residents, however urban residents had lower risk AOR: 0.83, 95% CI 0.78, 0.87) compared to the rural.
Women from poorest1.10 (1.03, 1.18), poorer (AOR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.63, 0.72) and middle wealth quartiles (AOR: 0.77, 95% CI 0.71, 0.82) were less likely to have raised total cholesterol compared to the richest, while those from richer households (AOR: 1.10, 95% CI 1.03, 1.17) were more likely. Housewives 1.37 1.26, 1.48) (AOR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.23, 1.46), merchants (AOR: 1.24, 95% CI 1.12, 1.37), and government employees (AOR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.53, 1.92) had higher odds of raised total cholesterol compared to other occupations. Women from households with family size ≤ 4 were three times more likely to have raised total cholesterol (AOR: 2.88, 95% CI 2.75, 3.02) compared to those with > 4 family size. Lack of advice from health professionals increased the likelihood (AOR: 4.11, 95% CI 3.93, 4.30), as did non-membership in functional WDA (AOR: 1.69, 95% CI 1.62, 1.78). Women without family history of NCDs (AOR: 2.63, 95% CI 2.37, 2.91) had higher risk of raised total cholesterol.
Table 6
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression of raised cholesterol level and independent variables among reproductive-age women in Gofa and Basketo zones, South Ethiopia
Candidate Variables | Raised Cholesterol Level |
| COR (95%CI) | P-value | AOR (95%CI) | P-value |
Age | | | | |
15–24 | 0.79(0.75, 0.83) | < .001 | 0.50 (0.47, 0.53) | < .001* |
25–34 | 0.91(0.87, 0.95) | < .001 | 0.77 (0.73, 0.81) | < .001* |
≥ 35 | 1 | | 1 | |
Educational status | | | | |
Illiterate | 1 | < .001 | 1 | |
Able to read and write | 0.65 (0.61, 0.71) | < .001 | 0.68 (0.62, 0.74) | < .001* |
Primary education | 1.28 (1.22, 1.34) | 0.512 | 1.07 (1.02, 1.13) | .006* |
Secondary education and above | 1.26 (1.21, 1.32) | | 1.09 (1.02, 1.16) | .007* |
Marital status | | | | |
Married | 0.42(0.38, 0.46) | < .001 | 0.82 (0.73, 0.92) | < .001* |
Single | 0.41(0.36, 0.47) | < .001 | 0.90 (0.77, 1.06) | .213 |
Widowed/Divorced | 1 | | 1 | |
Residence | | | | |
Urban | 1.78(1.69, 1.86) | < .001 | 0.83 (0.78, 0.87) | < .001* |
Rural | 1 | | 1 | |
Zone | | | | |
Gofa | 3.49(3.07, 3.98) | < .001 | 4.11 (3.59, 4.71) | < .001* |
Basketo | 1 | | 1 | |
Wealth index | | | | |
Poorest | 1.21(1.15, 1.29) | < .001 | 1.10 (1.03, 1.18) | .003* |
Poorer | 0.66(0.62, 0.71) | < .001 | 0.67 (0.63, 0.72) | < .001* |
Middle | 0.76(0.71, 0.81) | < .001 | 0.77 (0.715, 0.82) | < .001* |
Richer | 1.04(0.98, 1.11) | .176 | 1.10 (1.03, 1.17) | .004* |
Richest | 1 | | 1 | |
Occupational status | | | | |
Housewife | 1.25(1.17, 1.33) | < .001 | 1.34 (1.23, 1.46) | < .001* |
Merchant | 1.02(.94, 1.12) | .598 | 1.24 (1.12, 1.37) | < .001* |
Government employee | 2.81(2.56, 3.08) | < .001 | 1.71 (1.53, 1.92) | < .001* |
Other | 1 | | 1 | |
Family size | | | | |
≤ 4 | 2.41(2.32, 2.51) | < .001 | 2.88 (2.75, 3.02) | < .001* |
> 4 | 1 | | 1 | |
Getting advice from health professionals | | | | |
No | 3.72(3.58, 3.87) | < .001 | 4.11 (3.93, 4.30) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Family history of NCDs | | | | |
No | 1.91(1.74, 2.10) | < .001 | 2.63 (2.37, 2.91) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Is your WDA functional? | | | | |
No | 1.51(1.45, 1.58) | < .001 | 1.69 (1.62, 1.78) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
COR-Crude Odds Ratio: odds ratio by bivariate analysis. 95% CI: confidence interval at the 95% level.
AOR-Adjusted OR: odds ratio by multiple logistic regression 1: Referent category
Clustering of biological NCD risk factors
Over twenty-seven percent of participants had at least one biological risk factor, while nine percent had two or more. The prevalence of biological risk factors among reproductive-age women is depicted in Fig. 1, and Table 7 outlines the crude and adjusted odds ratios for the clustering of risk factors among women in the Gofa and Basketo zones. Logistic regression analysis revealed that women aged 25–34 (AOR: 1.58, 95% CI 1.53, 1.64) and > = 35 years (AOR: 1.96, 95% CI 1.88, 2.04) were more likely to experience co-occurrence of risk factors compared to those aged 15–24 years. Illiterate women (AOR: 1.17, 95% CI 1.12, 1.22), those able to read and write (AOR: 2.17, 95% CI 2.06, 2.28), and those with primary education (AOR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.20, 1.30) were more likely to have co-occurrence of risk factors compared to those with secondary education. Single women (AOR: 1.50, 95% CI 1.47, 1.71) were more likely to experience co-occurrence of risk factors compared to married women, however widowed/divorced women (AOR: 0.91, 95% CI 0.83, 0.99) had lower risk. Additionally, women residing in Gofa (AOR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.39, 1.55) and rural areas (AOR: 1.42, 95% CI 1.36, 1.47) were more likely to have co-occurrence of NCD risk factors. Wealth status also showed associations, with participants in the richest (AOR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.17, 1.27) and middle (AOR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.14, 1.24) quartiles being more likely to have co-occurrence of risk factors compared to the first quartile. However, participants from the poorer (AOR: 0.74, 95% CI 0.71, 0.78) and richer (AOR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.73, 0.79) quartiles were less likely to have risk factors. Occupation-wise, government employees (AOR: 3.83, 95% CI 3.56, 4.12), merchants (AOR: 1.88, 95% CI 1.77, 1.99), and housewives (AOR: 1.81, 95% CI 1.70, 1.89) were more likely to have co-occurrence of risk factors. Non-membership in functional WDA (AOR: 1.66, 95% CI 1.62, 1.71), family history of NCDs (AOR: 1.76, 95% CI 1.68, 1.84), and lack of health professional advice (AOR: 2.51, 95% CI 2.44, 2.58) were also associated with a higher probability of co-occurrence of risk factors.
Table 7
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression of clustering of biological risk factors and independent variables among reproductive-age women in Gofa and Basketo zones, South Ethiopia
Variables | Clustering of biological risk factors |
| COR (95%CI) | P-value | AOR (95%CI) | P-value |
Age | | | | |
15–24 | 1 | | 1 | |
25–34 | 1.78 (1.73, 1.84) | < .001 | 1.58 (1.53, 1.64) | < .001* |
≥ 35 | 2.12 (2.05, 2.19) | < .001 | 1.96 (1.88, 2.04) | < .001* |
Educational status | | | | |
Illiterate | 1.18 (1.14, 1.22) | < .001 | 1.17 (1.12, 1.22) | .002* |
Able to read and write | 1.96 (1.87, 2.04) | < .001 | 2.17 (2.06, 2.28) | < .001* |
Primary education | 1.09 (1.05, 1.12) | < .001 | 1.25 (1.20, 1.30) | .012* |
Secondary education and above | 1 | | 1 | |
Marital status | | | | |
Married | 1 | | 1 | |
Single | 1.22 (1.15, 1.29) | < .001 | 1.50 (1.47, 1.71) | < .001* |
Widowed/Divorced | 1.53 (1.39, 1.69) | .012 | 0.91 (0.83, 0.99) | .042* |
Zone | | | | |
Gofa | 1.20 (1.15, 1.26) | < .001 | 1.47 (1.39, 1.55) | < .001* |
Basketo | 1 | | 1 | |
Residence | | | | |
Urban | 1 | | 1 | |
Rural | 0.82 (0.81, 0.85) | < .001 | 1.42 (1.36, 1.47) | < .001* |
Wealth index | | | | |
Poorest | 1 | | 1 | |
Poorer | .84 (.81, .88) | < .001 | .74 (.71, .78) | < .001* |
Middle | 1.40 (1.35, 1.45) | < .001 | 1.19 (1.14, 1.24) | < .001* |
Richer | 1.04 (1.00, 1.08) | .026 | .76 (.73, .79) | < .001* |
Richest | 1.55 (1.50, 1.61) | < .001 | 1.16 (1.12, 1.21) | <.001* |
Occupational status | | | | |
Housewife | 1.89 (1.81, 1.97) | < .001 | 1.81 (1.70, 1.89) | < .001* |
Merchant | 2.06 (1.96,2.18) | < .001 | 1.88 (1.77, 1.99) | < .001* |
Government employee | 5.31 (4.98, 5.67) | < .001 | 3.83 (3.56, 4.12) | < .001* |
Other | 1 | | 1 | |
Family size | | | | |
≤ 4 | 0.81 (0.79, 0.83) | < .001 | 1.01 (.98, 1.04) | .708 |
>4 | 1 | | 1 | |
Getting advice from health professionals | | | | |
No | 2.37 (2.31, 2.43) | < .001 | 2.51 (2.44, 2.58) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
Family history of NCDs | | | | |
No | 1 | < .001 | 1 | |
Yes | 2.15 (2.06, 2.24) | | 1.76 (1.68, 1.84) | < .001* |
Is your WDA functional? | | | | |
No | 1.60 (1.56, 1.64) | < .001 | 1.66 (1.62, 1.71) | < .001* |
Yes | 1 | | 1 | |
COR-Crude Odds Ratio: odds ratio by bivariate analysis. 95% CI: confidence interval at the 95% level.
AOR-Adjusted OR: odds ratio by multiple logistic regression 1: Referent category