Effect of family-oriented interviews on family function of young persons attending the family practice clinic in Oauthc, Ile Ife, south-western Nigeria

Figures & data

Table 1: Frequency distribution of respondents by socio-demographic characteristics

Socio- demographic characteristics	n (%)
Age in years (n = 221)
15–19	85 (38.5)
20–24	136 (61.5)
Sex (n = 221)
Male	80 (36.2)
Female	141 (63.8)
Religion (n = 221)
Christianity	189 (85.5)
Islam	32 (14.5)
Education (n = 221)
Secondary	109 (49.3)
Tertiary	112 (50.7)
Employment (n = 221)
Employed	12 (5.4)
Unemployed	209 (94.6)
Socio-economic classification (n = 219)^*
Class I	40 (18.3)
Class II	98 (44.8)
Class III	50 (22.8)
Class IV	29 (13.2)
Class V	2 (0.9)

^* Two respondents were orphans and were not captured by the Oyedeji et al. criteria.

Figure 1: Perceived family function of respondents.

Table 2: Relationship between family function and family type

Family type	Perceived family function		Statistic
	Functional	Dysfunctional	Pearson’s chi-square^*	p
	n (%)	n (%)
Monogamous	123 (87.2)	18 (12.8)	4.873	0.027^**
Polygamous	33 (73.3)	12 (26.7)
Single parent	27 (77.1)	8 (22.9)	0.937	0.333
Both parents	156 (83.9)	30 (16.1)

^** df = 1.

^** Significant, n = number.

Table 3: Relationship between perceived family function and relationship with family members

Relationship	Family function		Statistic
	Functional	Dysfunctional	Pearson’s chi-square^*	p
	n (%)	n (%)
With father
Very close	87 (91.6)	8 (8.4)	8.754	0.003^**
Not very close	79 (76.0)	25 (24.0)
With mother
Very close	138 (86.8)	21 (13.2)	5.328	0.021^**
Not very close	38 (73.1)	14 (26.9)
With siblings
Very close	149 (85.1)	26 (14.9)	3.862	0.049^**
Not very close	25 (71.4)	10 (28.6)

⁺ df = 1.

⁺⁺ Significant, n = number.

Table 4: Paired t-test comparing weeks 1 and 12 APGAR scores in the study population

Factor	Mean	Standard deviation	n	t (df)	p
Week one APGAR scores	7.820	1.715	213	6.292 (212)	< 0.001
Week twelve APGAR scores	8.160	1.376	213
Difference in mean	0.343	0.795