Participant characteristics at baseline and endline
| Baseline characteristic | Baseline | Endline | ||||||
| Control n (%) | Education treatment n (%) | P value | Total (N=4389) n (%) | Control n (%) | Education treatment n (%) | P value | Total (N=3786) n (%) | |
| In school at baseline | ||||||||
| In education | 1146 (51.4) | 1068 (49.5) | 0.203 | 2214 (50.4) | 988 (51.9) | 960 (51.0) | 0.588 | 1948 (51.5) |
| Not in education | 1084 (48.6) | 1091 (50.5) | 2175 (49.6) | 916 (48.1) | 922 (49.0) | 1838 (48.5) | ||
| Urban/Rural | ||||||||
| Rural | 1819 (81.6) | 1771 (82.0) | 0.693 | 3590 (81.8) | 1573 (82.6) | 1547 (82.2) | 0.737 | 3120 (82.4) |
| Urban | 411 (18.4) | 388 (18.0) | 799 (18.2) | 331 (17.4) | 335 (17.8) | 666 (17.6) | ||
| Region | ||||||||
| Hhohho | 657 (29.5) | 485 (22.5) | <0.001 | 1142 (26.0) | 532 (27.9) | 413 (21.9) | <0.001 | 945 (25.0) |
| Manzini | 707 (31.7) | 885 (41.0) | 1592 (36.3) | 604 (31.7) | 784 (41.7) | 1388 (36.7) | ||
| Shiselweni | 531 (23.8) | 355 (16.4) | 886 (20.2) | 472 (24.8) | 316 (16.8) | 788 (20.8) | ||
| Lubombo | 335 (15.0) | 434 (20.1) | 769 (17.5) | 296 (15.5) | 369 (19.6) | 665 (17.6) | ||
| Baseline highest school level attained | ||||||||
| Grade 1–7 (primary education) | 522 (23.4) | 473 (21.9) | 0.239 | 995 (22.7) | 449 (23.6) | 399 (21.2) | 0.114 | 848 (22.4) |
| Form 1–6 (secondary education) | 1656 (74.3) | 1622 (75.1) | 3278 (74.7) | 1411 (74.1) | 1427 (75.8) | 2838 (75.0) | ||
| Year 1–5 (tertiary education) | 52 (2.3) | 64 (3.0) | 116 (2.6) | 44 (2.3) | 56 (3.0) | 100 (2.6) | ||
| Baseline age categories | ||||||||
| 15–17 | 987 (44.3) | 905 (41.9) | 0.117 | 1892 (43.1) | 850 (44.6) | 800 (42.5) | 0.185 | 1650 (43.6) |
| 18–22 | 1243 (55.7) | 1254 (58.1) | 2497 (56.9) | 1054 (55.4) | 1082 (57.5) | 2136 (56.4) | ||
| Baseline risk lover attitude | ||||||||
| No | 1489 (66.8) | 1473 (68.2) | 861 (19.6) | 1285 (67.5) | 1276 (67.8) | 2561 (67.6) | ||
| Yes | 741 (33.2) | 686 (31.8) | 0.304 | 890 (20.3) | 619 (32.5) | 606 (32.2) | 0.838 | 1225 (32.4) |
| Assets-based social economic status at baseline | ||||||||
| Poorest | 425 (19.1) | 436 (20.2) | 861 (19.6) | 369 (19.4) | 365 (19.4) | 734 (19.4) | ||
| Second | 448 (20.1) | 442 (20.5) | 890 (20.3) | 386 (20.3) | 380 (20.2) | 766 (20.2) | ||
| Middle | 497 (22.3) | 479 (22.2) | 976 (22.2) | 424 (22.3) | 431 (22.9) | 855 (22.6) | ||
| Fourth | 496 (22.2) | 401 (18.6) | 897 (20.4) | 434 (22.8) | 355 (18.9) | 789 (20.8) | ||
| Richest | 364 (16.3) | 401 (18.6) | 0.024 | 765 (17.4) | 291 (15.3) | 351 (18.7) | 0.009 | 642 (17.0) |
The measure of risk preference (‘Risk lover attitude’) was constructed as an indicator variable taking value 0 for respondents who preferred a fixed amount of money below or equal to the expected value (of 250 Emalangani) instead of a lottery with 50% chance of winning 500 Emalangani, and 1 otherwise. The asset-based socio-economic status measure is based on four questions: access to electricity, access to water in own dwelling, ownership of a car or truck and whether the household experienced problems in satisfying the food needs of the household. The answers to those questions were used to create an index—later divided in five quintiles, using principal component analysis, following Vyas and Kumaranayake.23
n, number of observations.