Caesarean and Age.

Women Frequency Table

Caesarean 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
NO 1 5 15 40 56 124 128 203 257 341 444 337 379 349 248 487 441 368 269 276 609 314 210 247 144 124 121 243 37 45 33 91 35 19 12
YES 0 1 5 19 30 74 88 120 174 220 258 218 269 215 202 354 311 207 158 196 343 162 144 131 80 83 64 164 27 23 17 53 12 7 6
Caesarean and Age.Women Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table
Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 47.392, df = 34, p-value = 0.06325
Interpretation: P-value = 0.06 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Age.Women.
 Caesarean and Education Frequency Table
Caesarean NON PRIMARY SSC INTERMEDIATE HIGHER
NO 2672 1539 847 1066 928
YES 1105 869 539 878 1044

Caesarean and Education Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 352.05, df = 4, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Education.
 Caesarean and SES Frequency Table
Caesarean Poorest Poor Middle Rich Richest
NO 1374 1488 1611 1504 1075
YES 434 1066 1035 724 1176

Caesarean and SES Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 385.22, df = 4, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and SES.
 Caesarean and Delivery.Place Frequency Table
Caesarea
n GOVT.HOSPITAL PRIVATE CLINIC PRIVATE HOSPITAL
NO 3612 1260 2180
YES 1004 275 3156

Caesarean and Delivery.Place Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 1780.3, df = 2, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and
Delivery.Place.
 Caesarean and Prenatal.Care Frequency Table
Caesarean NO NO RESPONSE YES
NO 525 4 6523
YES 145 2 4288

Caesarean and Prenatal.Care Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 86.518, df = 2, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Prenatal.Care.
 Caesarean and Doctor.Attend Frequency Table
Caesarean NO YES
NO 2164 4888
YES 0 4435

Caesarean and Doctor.Attend Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction
data: x
X-squared = 1674.8, df = 1, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Doctor.Attend.
 Caesarean and Times.Prenatal Frequency Table
Caesarean 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
57 44 94 97 99 52 44 40 42
NO 8 0 2 1221 5 9 5 4 6 0 102
18 11 35 60 77 46 46 36 48
YES 4 2 2 550 3 5 0 0 1 8 90

Caesarean and Times.Prenatal Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 479.58, df = 10, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and
Times.Prenatal.
 Caesarean and Births Frequency Table
1 1 1
Caesarean 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2
85 77 59 46 26 15 9 3 1
NO 1521 1188 1095 2 4 2 5 5 0 6 4 5 5
55 55 35 25 16 5 2 1
YES 948 769 655 3 1 5 5 0 92 7 7 0 3

Caesarean and Births Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 11.515, df = 12, p-value = 0.4854
Interpretation: P-value = 0.48 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Births.
 Caesarean and Twins Frequency Table
Caesarean MULTIPLE SINGLE
NO 163 6889
YES 87 4348

Caesarean and Twins Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction

data: x
X-squared = 1.4042, df = 1, p-value = 0.236
Interpretation: P-value = 0.236 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Twins.
 Caesarean and Consultation Frequency Table
Caesarean NO YES
NO 6969 83
YES 84 4351

Caesarean and Consultation Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction
data: x
X-squared = 10789, df = 1, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Consultation.
 Caesarean and Birth.Weight Frequency Table
Caesarean 3 3.2 4 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.8 4.9 5 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6 6.2 6.3 6.5 6.6
NO 279 182 112 1 4042 145 55 64 1942 101 1 2 1 19 99 6 1 0
YES 344 200 65 0 2768 139 36 64 638 51 0 4 1 13 98 13 0 1
Caesarean and Birth.Weight Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table
Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 369.4, df = 17, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Birth.Weight.
Long data some display is omitted

Caesarean and Age.Husband Frequency Table

Caesarean 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
NO 1 7 20 25 41 79 77 138 208 170 216 268 295 382 307 422 346 375 476 345 332 382
YES 0 1 6 16 17 47 48 83 141 116 170 167 192 230 235 284 249 264 280 217 194 248
Caesarean and Age.Husband Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table
Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 81.441, df = 45, p-value = 0.0007153
Interpretation: P-value = 0.00 so Reject H0 and concluded that there is
a significant association between Cesarean and Age.Husband.
Caesarean and Pre.Living Frequency Table
Caesarean RURAL URBAN
NO 5469 1583
YES 3221 1214

Caesarean and Pre.Living Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction
data: x
X-squared = 35.594, df = 1, p-value = 2.43e-09
Interpretation: P-value = 2.4 X 10-09 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Pre.Living.
Caesarean and Last.Child Frequency Table
Caesarean NO NO RESPONSE YES
NO 1304 5 5743
YES 728 2 3705

Caesarean and Last.Child Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 8.3958, df = 2, p-value = 0.01503
Interpretation: P-value = 0.01 so Reject H0 and concluded that there is
a significant association between Cesarean and Last.Child.
Caesarean and Later.Child Frequency Table
Caesarean NO NO RESPONSE YES
NO 2434 9 4609
YES 923 6 3506

Caesarean and Later.Child Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 247.25, df = 2, p-value < 2.2e-16
Interpretation: P-value = 2.2 X 10-16 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Later.Child.
Caesarean and Birth.Ever Frequency Table
Caesarean NO YES
NO 6 7046
YES 7 4428

Caesarean and Birth.Ever Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction
data: x
X-squared = 0.71249, df = 1, p-value = 0.3986
Interpretation: P-value = 0.39 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Birth.Ever.
Caesarean and Ever.Died Frequency Table
Caesarean NO YES
NO 5838 1214
YES 3773 662

Caesarean and Ever.Died Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction
data: x
X-squared = 10.266, df = 1, p-value = 0.001355
Interpretation: P-value = 0.00 so Reject H0 and concluded that there is
a significant association between Cesarean and Ever.Died.
Caesarean and Boys.Dead Frequency Table
Caesarean 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
NO 6340 610 77 18 3 3 1
YES 4017 371 41 6 0 0 0

Caesarean and Boys.Dead Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 7.4151, df = 6, p-value = 0.2842
Interpretation: P-value = 0.28 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Boys.Dead.
Caesarean and Girls.Dead Frequency Table
Caesarean 0 1 2 3 4 6
NO 6379 570 81 18 2 2
YES 4112 281 37 5 0 0

Caesarean and Girls.Dead Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 20.634, df = 5, p-value = 0.0009497
Interpretation: P-value = 0.00 so Reject H0 and concluded that there is
a significant association between Cesarean and Girls.Dead.
Caesarean and Breastfeed Frequency Table
Caesarean NO NO RESPONSE YES
NO 520 2 6530
YES 453 2 3980

Caesarean and Breastfeed Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 28.581, df = 2, p-value = 6.218e-07
Interpretation: P-value = 6.212 X 10-07 so Reject H0 and concluded that
there is a significant association between Cesarean and Breastfeed.
 Caesarean and Respondent.HH Frequency Table
Caesarean 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 23 25 26
NO 626 4946 660 492 91 63 48 38 30 23 11 7 5 2 6 1 0 1 1 1 0 0
YES 400 3156 397 283 67 29 32 18 15 13 8 3 1 3 2 2 1 0 1 2 1 1
Caesarean and Respondent.HH Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table
Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 17.698, df = 21, p-value = 0.668
Interpretation: P-value = 0.668 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Respondent.HH.
 Caesarean and Members.HH Frequency Table
Caesarean 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 29 30 31
NO 47 210 336 895 763 2626 606 558 252 189 109 80 56 31 22 100 10 12 132 5 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 1
YES 34 152 190 563 507 1690 373 318 174 99 77 45 31 22 19 61 3 7 53 3 4 3 1 0 2 3 0 1 0
Caesarean and Members.HH Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table
Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 29.86, df = 28, p-value = 0.37
Interpretation: P-value = 0.37 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Members.HH.
 Caesarean and Womens.HH Frequency Table
Caesarean 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
NO 2849 2482 1020 476 150 61 10 1 3 0
YES 1841 1474 685 295 106 23 6 3 1 1

Caesarean and Womens.HH Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test
data: x
X-squared = 15.125, df = 9, p-value = 0.08757
Interpretation: P-value = 0.08 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Womens.HH.
 Caesarean and Area Frequency Table
Caesarean RURAL URBAN
NO 3282 3770
YES 2073 2362

Caesarean and Area Chi-Suqared Test of Contigency Table

Pearson's Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity
correction
data: x
X-squared = 0.03683, df = 1, p-value = 0.8478
Interpretation: P-value = 0.84 so accept H0 that there is no
significant association between Cesarean and Area.