ArticlePloS one2016
Socio-Economic Disparities in Use of Family Planning Methods among Pakistani Women: Findings from Pakistan Demographic and Health Surveys.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Contraceptive behaviors and media influence among women in Bangladesh: exploring the effects of age and education.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Pooled it
- Knowledge, attitude, and contraceptive use among married women attending a maternity hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan: a cross-sectional study.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2026Article
- Trends and patterns of inequality in modern contraceptive use in urban and rural India: are family planning programmes increasingly reaching the marginalized?Health policy and planning · 2026Article
- Acceptability and utilization of modern contraceptives and associated factors among childbearing-aged women in Northern Ghana: a cross-sectional study.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Using causal loop diagrams to examine the interrelationships between factors influencing family planning utilisation in urban east central Uganda.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Women undergoing Caesarean Section: A prospective hospital-based study from Sindh, Pakistan.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Examining the decline in modern contraception usage among married women in Bangladesh: Applying Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analysis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Predictors of voluntary uptake of modern contraceptive methods in rural Sindh, Pakistan.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Male Involvement in Family Planning Decisions in Malawi and Tanzania: What Are the Determinants?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Four in ten married women demands satisfied by modern contraceptives in high fertility sub-Saharan Africa countries: a multilevel analysis of demographic and health surveys.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of Sociocultural Factors on Contraceptive Use: A Case Study of Pakistan.BioMed research international · 2022Article
- Exploring Readiness for Birth Control in Improving Women Health Status: Factors Influencing the Adoption of Modern Contraceptives Methods for Family Planning Practices.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- A Cross-Sectional Study to Assess the Frequency and Risk Factors Associated with Cesarean Section in Southern Punjab, Pakistan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Demand for family planning satisfied with modern methods among sexually active women in low- and middle-income countries: who is lagging behind?Reproductive health · 2018Article
- Delivering reproductive health services through non-state providers in Pakistan: understanding the value for money of different approaches.Global health research and policy · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral developing countries like Pakistan step into Sustainable Development Goals period with crucial maternal and child health needs that need to be addressed for improving health outcomes among people. We aim to explore existent socio-economic disparities in use of family planning methods (FPM) among Pakistani women, and compare any such inequalities between the years 2006 and 2013.
settingPakistan Demographic and Health Surveys (PDHS) 2006-7 (n = 9177) and the most recent 2012-13(n = 13558) data were used to conduct secondary analysis. Participants were ever married women aged between 15 and 49 years. Socio-economic status was assessed by the education level and wealth index. Inequalities were measured through Odds Ratio (OR), Relative Index of inequality (RII), and Slope index of inequality (SII) on non-use of FPM.
resultsAlthough the prevalence of FPM use has increased over time (28% in 2006 versus 54% in 2013), the socio-economic inequalities persistently exist. Comparing results of PDHS 2006 with PDHS 2013, education related absolute inequalities among urban dwellers increased from -0.41 (95% CI -0.67, -0.13, p-value < 0.01) to -0.83 (95% CI -1.02, -0.63, p-value < 0.01); and increased from -0.93 (95% CI -1.21, -0.64, p-value < 0.01) to -0.98 (95% CI -1.20, -0.76, p-value < 0.01) among rural dwellers. Similarly wealth related absolute inequalities are also existent.
conclusionsAlthough the FPM use has increased over time, but it is important to note that socio-economic gap in use of FPM persists. Such differences have disadvantaged the poor and the illiterate. Family planning programs may target the disadvantaged subgroups for ensuring well-being of women and children in Pakistan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.