Skip to main content

Table 2 The status of quality of care and comparison of different status of quality of care by gender

From: Quality of care and suspected developmental delay among children aged 1–59 months: a cross-sectional study in 8 counties of rural China

  N a n (%) Male
n (%)
Female
n (%)
P
Five items
 Availability of children’s books 1927 710 (36.8) 377 (36.3) 333 (37.5) 0.606
 Availability of playthings 1927 1759 (91.3) 950 (91.5) 809 (91.0) 0.686
 Support for learning 596 495 (83.1) 274 (81.3) 221 (85.3) 0.194
 Father’s support for learning 596 98 (16.4) 57 (16.9) 41 (15.8) 0.723
 Inadequate care 1916 93 (4.9) 44 (4.3) 49 (5.5) 0.201
Overall assessment
 Poor quality of care 1916 176 (9.2) 96 (9.3) 80 (9.0) 0.943
 Medium quality of care 1916 1111 (58.0) 599 (58.2) 512 (57.8)  
 Good quality of care 1916 629 (32.8) 335 (32.5) 294 (33.2)  
  1. ain accordance to MICS5 definitions, “availability of children’s books”, “availability of playthings” and “inadequate care” are applicable for children aged 1–59 months (N = 1927). “Support for learning” and “father’s support for learning” are applicable for children aged 36–59 months (N = 596). 11 caregivers had forgot the details about inadequate care (N = 1916)