Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27710196›Full record

ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2017

Women's Contraceptive Preference-Use Mismatch.

Katherine He, Vanessa K Dalton, Melissa K Zochowski, Kelli Stidham Hall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Barriers to Preferred Contraception Use in Mississippi.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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.

Katherine He1 University of Michigan Medical School , Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Vanessa K Dalton2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Program on Women's Health Care Effectiveness Research, Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan , Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Melissa K Zochowski3 Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program, University of Michigan , Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Kelli Stidham Hall4 Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University , Atlanta, Georgia .

Funding

Michigan BIRCWH Career Development ProgramK12HD001438 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI JOHNSON, TIMOTHY RB · 2000 to 2014
$6.7M
NICHD NIH HHS K12 HD001438
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily planning research has not adequately addressed women's preferences for different contraceptive methods and whether women's contraceptive experiences match their preferences.

methodsData were drawn from the Women's Healthcare Experiences and Preferences Study, an Internet survey of 1,078 women aged 18-55 randomly sampled from a national probability panel. Survey items assessed women's preferences for contraceptive methods, match between methods preferred and used, and perceived reasons for mismatch. We estimated predictors of contraceptive preference with multinomial logistic regression models.

resultsAmong women at risk for pregnancy who responded with their preferred method (n = 363), hormonal methods (non-LARC [long-acting reversible contraception]) were the most preferred method (34%), followed by no method (23%) and LARC (18%). Sociodemographic differences in contraception method preferences were noted (p-values <0.05), generally with minority, married, and older women having higher rates of preferring less effective methods, compared to their counterparts. Thirty-six percent of women reported preference-use mismatch, with the majority preferring more effective methods than those they were using. Rates of match between preferred and usual methods were highest for LARC (76%), hormonal (non-LARC) (65%), and no method (65%). The most common reasons for mismatch were cost/insurance (41%), lack of perceived/actual need (34%), and method-specific preference concerns (19%).

conclusionWhile preference for effective contraception was common among this sample of women, we found substantial mismatch between preferred and usual methods, notably among women of lower socioeconomic status and women using less effective methods. Findings may have implications for patient-centered contraceptive interventions.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePatient PreferenceAdultContraceptionContraception BehaviorContraceptive Agents, FemaleFemaleHumansInternetMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CareSocioeconomic FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesYoung AdultContraceptive Agents, Femalecontraceptionhealth service deliverypatient-centeredpatient preferencereproductive healthwomen's health

Identifiers

PMID27710196
PMCPMC5512313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.