4.2 Article

Spatial distribution and multilevel analysis of factors associated with child marriage in Nigeria

期刊

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 171-181

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/inthealth/ihac030

关键词

child marriage; Demographic and health survey; mapping; multilevel analysis; Nigeria; spatial analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Child marriage is a significant issue in Nigeria, with hotspot areas identified in Sokoto, Kebbi, Katsina, Kano, Jigawa, Yobe, Bauchi, Niger, Borno, Gombe, and Adamawa. Factors such as current employment status and partner's education level are associated with the likelihood of child marriage.
Background Child marriage among women has become a major threat to the rights of women, especially in low- and middle-income countries. The marriage of girls below age 18 y is a major public and global health challenge. Therefore, this study examined the spatial pattern and factors associated with child marriage in Nigeria. Methods The data were sourced from the 2018 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey. The study included a total of 4283 young women aged 20-24 y. The findings were provided in the form of spatial maps and adjusted ORs (aORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Hotspot areas for child marriage in Nigeria were located in Sokoto, Kebbi, Katsina, Kano, Jigawa, Yobe, Bauchi, Niger, Borno, Gombe, and Adamawa. The prevalence of child marriage in Nigeria was 41.50%. The likelihood of child marriage in Nigeria was high among those currently working (aOR=1.31; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.55) compared with young women who were not working. On the other hand, young women whose partners had secondary education and above (aOR=0.57; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.73) were less likely to report child marriage in Nigeria compared with those whose partners had no education. Conclusions The findings of the study indicate that there are several hotspots in Nigeria that need to be targeted when implementing interventions aimed at eliminating child marriage in the country.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据