ArticleDisability and health journal2017
Disparities in receipt of family planning services by disability status: New estimates from the National Survey of Family Growth.
Article in Disability and health journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mental health outcomes across the reproductive life course among women with disabilities: a systematic review.Archives of women's mental health · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- From words to actions: systematic review of interventions to promote sexual and reproductive health of persons with disabilities in low- and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Sexual and Reproductive Health Care Receipt Among Female Adolescents and Young Adults With Disability in the United States, 2011-2019.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025Article
- Modern family planning method utilization and associated factors among women with disabilities in the Wolaita Zone, Ethiopia: a mixed methods study.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Obstetric Care and Pregnancy Health in Autistic Individuals and Those with Other Developmental Disabilities in an Integrated Healthcare Setting in California.Autism in adulthood · 2025Article
- Coverage Gaps and Contraceptive Use Among Medicare Enrollees With Disabilities.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Use of modern contraceptives on the basis of disability severity in Uganda: analysis of the 2016 demographic and health survey.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Article
- Article
- Pregnancy Intendedness Among Racial and Ethnically Minoritized Women with Disabilities.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2024Article
- Reproductive healthcare in adolescents with autism and other developmental disabilities.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2024Article
- Changes in postpartum insurance and care use by disability status during the COVID-19 pandemic.Disability and health journal · 2024Article
- Factors associated with willingness and preferences to attend family services in Hong Kong: A population-based survey.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Experiences of Women With Disabilities in Accessing and Receiving Contraceptive Care.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2021Article
- Birth intentions among US fathers with disabilities.Disability and health journal · 2021Article
- Perceptions of barriers to effective family planning services among women with disabilities.Disability and health journal · 2021Article
- Intimate partner violence, reproductive coercion, and unintended pregnancy in women with disabilities.Disability and health journal · 2020Article
- Pregnancy Intendedness by Maternal Disability Status and Type in the United States.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2020Article
- Contraceptive Practices and Reproductive Health Considerations for Adolescent and Adult Women with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: A Review of the Literature.Sexuality and disability · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA substantial and increasing population of US women of childbearing age live with disability. Disability-based disparities in access to family planning services have been previously documented, but few studies have used population-based data sources or evidence-based measures of disability.
objectiveTo determine population-based estimates of use of family planning services among women 15-44 years of age in the United States, and to examine differences by disability status.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey, the 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth. These analyses include 11,300 female respondents between the ages of 15 and 44 who completed in-person interviews in respondents' homes.
resultsApproximately 17.8% of respondents reported at least one disability in at least one domain. Women with disabilities were less likely than those without disabilities to receive services; the largest differences by disability status were seen among women with low education, low income, and those who were not working. Logistic regression analysis suggests that women with physical disabilities and those with poorer general health are less likely to receive services.
conclusionsWomen living with disabilities reported lower receipt of family planning services compared to women without disabilities, but the differences were small in some subgroups and larger among disadvantaged women. Physical disabilities and poor health may be among the factors underlying these patterns. Further research is needed on other factors that affect the ability of women with disabilities to obtain the services they need to prevent unintended pregnancy.
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.