C. Mathematical Data
To examine system effects to the IPV and routes, the research exploited making use of a good cutoff endurance placed on a continuous program eligibility index (PMT score) to recognize procedures and you will research communities. For this reason, email address details are legitimate into the society around the endurance and you may create perhaps not show an entire delivery from socioeconomic standing during the study communities. As the an excellent discontinuity can be used with the project of medication, we make certain the fresh new problems that normally need hold having an everyday regression discontinuity design method to become legitimate inside our analysis, along with no control within threshold or expertise in the new algorithm of the prospective beneficiaries so you can determine the eligibility status. The new formal decide to try from harmony anywhere between research and cures communities is actually including stated towards the current take to when you look at the tables dos and you will 3 (col. 10). About total concentrating on do it presented, the newest PMT ratings varied regarding ?step three.294 so you’re able to cuatro.601 z-ratings, throughout review shot, this new PMT score vary from ?0.571 so you’re able to 0.324 z-ratings, towards the program qualifications cutoff on ?0.106 z-ratings ( fundamental deviation = 0.thirty-two ). 6 Homes was in fact methodically sampled within the cutoff to possess evaluation intentions, therefore the ensuing property on the treatment test is actually within 0.46 important deviations of your cutoff, as well as evaluation properties was contained in this 0.43 simple deviations of one’s cutoff. Considering the short endurance of one’s delivery out-of tested domiciles to the fresh new PMT score, a simple Performed was applied to test the fresh has an effect on of your own program: seven
Manage variables included in the research incorporated individual- and you may household-height indicators and community-level repaired outcomes. 8 In the personal top, we managed getting years (in years) and you will evidence for official training of each other girl and you may spouse. nine Next, in research of the full take to, i handle to be inside an effective polygamous connection (resource group try nonpolygamous otherwise, for simple description, a good monogamous connection). Household-height control variables integrated dating site By ethnicity singles only household size and PMT rating. 10 We statement the manner of all of the area indicator details during the detailed equilibrium and you can attrition dining tables; not, even as we were people-height fixed outcomes, such symptoms commonly used in regression investigation (districts: East Mamprusi, Karaga, and you can Yendi regarding North Region and Bongo and Garu Tempane in the Top Eastern Part). To evaluate distinctions by members of the family construction, we interact the new sign to have polygamous partnership with the cures signal, big date indication, and you may impact imagine (carrying out a triple correspondence title): eleven
D. Attrition
Attrition over the panel period has potential to threaten the internal validity and generalizability of the findings. Overall attrition in our analytic sample is approximately 10%, slightly higher than the overall household sample rate of 6.6%, and does not vary significantly between treatment and comparison samples ( p -value = .35 using a simple t-test; Table 1). Further, we investigate whether the sample lost to follow-up differs significantly from our panel sample in terms of IPV outcomes, control variables, or pathway indicators (tables 2, 3). Column 7 shows the mean difference between the sample lost to follow-up in the treatment group, as compared with the same in the comparison group. Column 8 shows the p-value of this difference derived from a regression using treatment to predict the specific indicator, controlling for the PMT score and restricting to attritors. Table 2 shows that across 12 background characteristics and 14 pathway variables, only one is significant at the p < .05 level (there is a statistically significantly higher proportion of the treatment group lost to follow-up as compared with the comparison group in Bongo district). Table 3 shows that across 15 outcome indicators, the only ones to show evidence of differential attrition at p < .05 or lower are those measuring the frequency of sexual IPV (means of those lost to follow-up in the comparison group are slightly higher at .28 vs. the treatment group at .26). These results indicate that the potential for bias in overall findings due to attrition is low. Despite these promising results, we do find that women leaving our sample across both treatment arms differ in terms of background characteristics from those who remain in our sample (p-values shown in cols. 3 and 6). For example, women who leave the sample are generally younger, better educated, in monogamous partnerships (vs. polygamous), and live in smaller households. This may be reflective of rural-to-urban migration or other mobility patterns, although these differences are not generally observed for pathway variables, including indicators of economic standing.