ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2019
Acceptability and utilization of family planning benefits cards by youth in slums in Kampala, Uganda.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Modern Contraceptive Use Among Young Women in Kampala Slums: Research Findings from the TOPOWA Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of increased contraceptive coverage using family planning benefits cards compared with the standard of care for young women in Uganda.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2023Article
- Disruption in Essential Health Service Delivery: A Qualitative Study on Access to Family Planning Information and Service Utilization During the First Wave of COVID-19 Pandemic in Uganda.Open access journal of contraception · 2022Article
- Sex differences in family planning knowledge, attitudes, and use in Uganda.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2021Article
- Knowledge and Information Exposure About Family Planning Among Women of Reproductive Age in Informal Settlements of Kira Municipality, Wakiso District, Uganda.Frontiers in global women's health · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was conducted to test the acceptability and utilization of family planning benefits cards (FPBCs) as incentives to increase family planning uptake among youth living in urban slums in Uganda.
methodsWe conducted a one-year pilot study with two sub-studies on acceptability and utilization of FPBCs. The acceptability study utilized a quantitative cross-sectional design and was part of a baseline household survey while the utilization study was a primary analysis of claims and clinic data. We performed descriptive analyses and analyses of the association between different variables using binary logistic regression.
resultsThe acceptability study included 280 eligible females. The majority were married (52%), Christian (87%), and aged 20 and above (84%). Acceptability of the program was high (93%). Seventy-two percent of females used the card at least once to access reproductive health services. Twenty-seven percent of female users discontinued family planning and 14% changed family planning methods during the study. Female users of short-term contraceptive methods were 11 times more likely to discontinue use of FPBCs compared to those who used long-term methods (adjusted OR = 10.9,
conclusionFamily planning benefits cards, deployed as incentives to increase uptake of family planning, exhibited high acceptability and utilization by youth in urban slums in Uganda. There was evidence that use of short-term contraception methods, professional employment, and lower parity were associated with discontinuation of modern family planning methods after initial enrolment.
trial registrationMUREC1/7 No. 10/05-17. Registered 19th, July 2017.
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.