Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26952021›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2016

Married women's decision making power on family planning use and associated factors in Mizan-Aman, South Ethiopia: a cross sectional study.

Abeba Daniel Belay, Zelalem Birhanu Mengesha, Manay Kifle Woldegebriel, Yalemzewod Assefa Gelaw

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 81 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Abeba Daniel BelayWoman, Children and Youths Affairs Bureau, Bench Maji Zone, Mizan Aman, Ethiopia. abydaniel2006@yahoo.com.
Zelalem Birhanu MengeshaInstitute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia. zelalem78@gmail.com.
Manay Kifle WoldegebrielInstitute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia. manay2000@gmail.com.
Yalemzewod Assefa GelawInstitute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia. yalassefa@gmail.com.
University of Gondar · ETAmhara Regional Health Bureau · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWomen's use of family planning service is influenced by many factors, especially by their decision making power. A woman's decision-making power, be it individual or decision made in collaboration with a partner, is the most important factor in the use of family planning in a household. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of women's decision making power on family planning use and its associated factors.

methodsA community-based cross-sectional study was conducted on married women in the child bearing age. The women who were living in Mizan city were selected using the simple random sampling method. Trained nurses collected the data by interview, using a structured and pre-tested questioner. Bivariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify the associated factors, and the odds ratio with a 95% CI was computed to assess the strength of the association. Collinearity was also assessed by looking at standard errors in the final fitted model.

resultOverall, more than two-thirds [67.2%: 95% CI (63-71%)] of the married women were found to be more autonomous to decide family planning use. Secondary education [AOR: 9.04, 95% CI: (4.50, 18.16)], government employment [AOR: 4.84, 95% CI: (2.03, 11.52)], being wives of government employed spouses [AOR 2.71, 95% CI: (1.24, 7.97)], having husbands with college or university education [AOR: 11.29, 95% CI: (4.66, 27.35)], and being in the younger age [AOR: 0.27, 95% CI :(0.09, 0.75)] were significantly associated with women's decision-making power on family planning.

conclusionsIn this study, women had a high decision making power in family planning use. Age category (34-44-years), formal education, and occupational status had effects on women's decision making power. Promoting parental adult education and engaging women in out of house employment is essential to improve their decision making power in using family planning.

Indexed as

Decision MakingInterpersonal RelationsPower, PsychologicalContraceptionContraception BehaviorCross-Sectional StudiesEmploymentEthiopiaFamily Planning ServicesFemaleHumansMaleSpouses

Identifiers

PMID26952021
PMCPMC4782567
OpenAlexW2295206670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.