Skip to main content

Table 5 Sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of the impact of DV laws on women’s unmet need for family planning

From: Domestic violence laws and women’s unmet need for family planning: Quasi-experimental evidence from Africa

Country

Sample size

Unmet need treatment effects† (95% CI)

Panel A (partner’s education)

357,538

 − 6.2***

(− 9.2, − 3.2)

Panel B (religion)

345,342

 − 6.2***

(− 9.5, − 3.0)

Panel C (macroeconomic characteristics)

367,208

 − 6.0***

(− 8.8, − 3.2)

Panel D (dropping countries not individually estimable)

327,158

 − 6.1***

(− 9.2, − 2.9)

Panel E (dropping country × years with negative weights)

345,887

 − 6.2***

(− 9.1, − 3.3)

Panel F (logit model)

367,208

 − 5.9***

(− 9.0, − 2.9)

Panel G (among women with a demand for FP)

207,630

 − 11.6***

(− 19.7, − 3.4)

  1. †Treatment effects reported the change in the probability of unmet need in percentage points terms with 95% confidence intervals (CI)
  2. *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1
  3. Standard errors clustered at the country-level
  4. TWFE model with survey year fixed effects and country fixed effects
  5. Controls: Individual-level controls include women’s age in 5-year intervals, education, age at first marriage, family size, wealth, and rural/urban residence. Country-level controls include country’s urbanization rates over time. Macroeconomic characteristics in panel C include GDP per capita growth and domestic public health expenditure as a percentage of GDP
Back to article page

Reproductive Health

ISSN: 1742-4755