DiD Estimates of Factory Workers' Exposure to FP and Their FP Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors in Port Said, Egypt
| Percentagea | DiD Results | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Baseline | Endline | Percentage Point Estimate | Adjusted Percentage Point Estimateb |
| Exposure outcomes | ||||
| Heard, read, or seen anything about FP in the last 6 months | ||||
| Intervention | 16.2 | 17.2 | −4.9 | −4.7 |
| Comparison | 16.9 | 22.8 | ||
| Has heard of Ma3looma website | ||||
| Intervention | 6.1 | 10.2 | −3.8 | −4.0 |
| Comparison | 6.0 | 13.8 | ||
| Knowledge outcomes | ||||
| Ever heard of an FP method | ||||
| Intervention | 76.5 | 74.3 | −6.5 | −7.8c |
| Comparison | 68.3 | 72.5 | ||
| Knows 3 modern FP methods | ||||
| Intervention | 34.5 | 38.9 | 0.8 | −0.3 |
| Comparison | 27.7 | 31.2 | ||
| Knows FP method that prevents sexually transmitted infections | ||||
| Intervention | 12.9 | 15.1 | −0.1 | −0.9 |
| Comparison | 14.3 | 16.7 | ||
| Attitudinal outcomes | ||||
| Disagrees with: “FP methods can affect female fertility and may reflect negatively on future pregnancies” | ||||
| Intervention | 41.0 | 43.7 | 8.3c | 9.2c |
| Comparison | 43.6 | 38.0 | ||
| Willing to use FP in the future (among individuals not currently using an FP method)d | ||||
| Intervention | 66.9 | 71.6 | 2.1 | 2.0 |
| Comparison | 74.3 | 77.0 | ||
| Behavioral outcomes (among married individuals who are not currently pregnant/whose wives are not currently pregnant) | ||||
| Currently using FPe | ||||
| Intervention | 62.6 | 69.9 | −1.7 | −0.9 |
| Comparison | 59.5 | 68.6 | ||
Abbreviations: DiD, Difference-in-Differences; FP, family planning.
↵a Sample sizes at baseline were n=1,145 for the intervention group and n=621 for the comparison group. Sample sizes at endline were n=813 for the intervention group and n=426 for the comparison group.
↵b Adjusted for age, residence, gender, education, employment, marital status, and number of children.
↵c P≤.05.
↵d Sample sizes at baseline were n=896 for the intervention group and n=521 for the comparison group. Sample sizes at endline were n=564 for the intervention group and n=343 for the comparison group.
↵e Sample sizes at baseline were n=398 for the intervention group and n=168 for the comparison group. Sample sizes at endline were n=356 for the intervention group and n=121 for the comparison group.