In the low-value conditional cash transfer arm, those numbers are 194 (37.4%) for 'very much' and 107 (20.6%) for 'somewhat'somewhat
However, individuals in the two intervention arms had slightly lower self-reported socioeconomic status, and individuals in the low-value conditional cash transfer arm also had a higher income.
Unadjusted RR for the high-value conditional cash transfer arm compared to the low-value conditional cash transfer arm was 0.76 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.03) and the adjusted RR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.92).
At month 12, the number of positives was 57 (9.7%) in the high-value conditional cash transfer arm, while it was 79 (12.8%) in the low-value conditional cash transfer arm and 126 (12.1%) in the control group.
It has three separate arms a control arm with an allocation ratio of 50% and two intervention arms (low-value conditional cash transfer and high-value conditional cash transfer), with an allocation ratio of 25% each.
Among the participants, 1285 were randomly selected, in a first stage, to one of the two conditional cash transfer arms: 615 (25.5%) were randomly assigned in the high-value conditional cash transfer arm and 660 (27.4%) in the low-value conditional cash transfer arm.
Participants randomised into the intervention arm were further invited to choose one of two balls from a second bag determining in which of the two intervention arms (low-value conditional cash transfers and high-value conditional cash transfers) they would be allocated.
This distinction must be interpreted with caution though because assignments were not masked, hence individuals in the low-value conditional cash transfer arm could have behaved differently than if they were to receive the same incentive in the absence of a higher conditional cash transfer arm.
The intervention arm was divided into two subarms a low-value conditional cash transfer arm eligible for up to $30 over the course of the study (10 000 Tanzanian shillings or approximately $10 per testing round) and a high-value conditional cash transfer arm eligible for up to $602020 000 Tanzanian shillings or approximately $20 per testing round).
Except for the 10 (0.4%) individuals who failed to be assigned to either the high or low-value conditional cash transfer arm, all participants tested and interviewed at the respective rounds were included in the analysis (refer to the sample sizes in tables 1 and 2).
Tests for statistical differences with the control arm yielded p values of 0.673 for the high-value conditional cash transfer arm and 0.742 for the low-value conditional cash transfer arm, so differences across the three study arms in the percentage of spouses joining the study are minimal and not statistically significant.
