Skip to main content

Table 1 Proportions of demographic features, distributional aspects of support-/abuse-variables, and their bivariate associations with street-status

From: Does school attendance reduce the risk of youth homelessness in Tanzania?

 

TOTAL BASE SAMPLE

REFERENCE

SUB-SAMPLE

TEST SUB-SAMPLES

TEST

  

Never been on the street

Part-time on the street

Full-time on the street

P-value

Male (a) N (%)

862 (100.0)

482 (55.9)

279 (32.4)

101 (11.7)

< .001

Female (a) N (%)

236 (100.0)

180 (76.3)

47 (19.9)

9 (3.8)

 

Attending daily (a) N (%)

663 (100.0)

502 (75.7)

136 (20.5)

25 (3.8)

< .001

Playing truant (a) N (%)

185 (100.0)

103 (55.7)

50 (27.0)

32 (17.3)

 

Dropout (a) N (%)

250 (100.0)

57 (22.8)

140 (56.0)

53 (21.2)

 

Age 5-9 N (%)

185 (100.0)

158 (85.4)

23 (12.4)

4 (2.2)

< .001

Age 10-14 N (%)

432 (100.0)

303 (70.1)

88 (20.4)

41 (9.5)

 

Age 15-19 N (%)

339 (100.0)

156 (46.0)

136 (40.1)

47 (13.9)

 

Age 20-24 N (%)

142 (100.00)

45 (31.7)

79 (55.6)

18 (12.7)

 

Total N (%)

1098 (100.0)

662 (60.3)

326 (29.7)

110 (10.0)

 

Emotional abuse (b)

.85 (1.14)

.74 (1.10)

.93 (1.16)

1.27 (1.25)

< .001

Physical abuse (b)

.89 (1.09)

.73 (1.03)

1.02 (1.12)

1.40 (1.15)

< .001

Sexual abuse (b)

.63 (1.00)

.53 (.95)

.74 (1.01)

.99 (1.14)

< .001

Trauma (b)

.78 (1.01)

.67 (.97)

.90 (1.04)

1.06 (1.09)

< .001

Neglect (b)

.82 (1.22)

.69 (1.13)

.94 (1.29)

1.37 (1.31)

< .001

Family love (b)

1.83 (1.18)

2.04 (1.10)

1.66 (1.18)

1.11 (1.26)

< .001

Family protection (b)

1.77 (1.18)

1.98 (1.11)

1.59 (1.17)

.97 (1.21)

< .001

Enough food (b)

1.75 (1.19)

1.97 (1.14)

1.52 (1.17)

1.12 (1.17)

< .001

  1. avalues are proportions, group comparisons are based on Chi square statistics
  2. bvalues are mean scores, group comparisons are based on analyses of variance (ANOVA)
  3. csub-proportion compared to those who have never been on the streets