Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32545564›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Structural Quality of Services and Use of Family Planning Services in Primary Health Care Facilities in Ethiopia. How Do Public and Private Facilities Compare?

Gizachew Assefa Tessema, Mohammad Afzal Mahmood, Judith Streak Gomersall, Yibeltal Assefa, Theodros Getachew Zemedu, Mengistu Kifle, Caroline O Laurence

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Gizachew Assefa TessemaSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Mohammad Afzal MahmoodSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Judith Streak GomersallSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
Yibeltal AssefaSchool of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia.
Theodros Getachew ZemeduHealth System and Reproductive Health Research Directorate, Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa 1242, Ethiopia.
Mengistu KifleFederal Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa 1234, Ethiopia.
Caroline O LaurenceSchool of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia.
The University of Adelaide · AUCurtin University · AUEthiopian Public Health Institute · ETFederal Ministry of Health · ETSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily planning (FP) is among the important interventions that reduce maternal mortality. Poor quality FP service is associated with lower services utilisation, in turn undermining the efforts to address maternal mortality. There is currently little research on the quality of FP services in the private sector in Ethiopia, and how it compares to FP services in public facilities.

methodsA secondary data analysis of two national surveys, Ethiopia Services Provision Assessment Plus Survey 2014 and Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey 2016, was conducted. Data from 1094 (139 private, 955 public) health facilities were analysed. In total, 3696 women were included in the comparison of users' characteristics. Logistic regression was conducted. Facility type (public vs. private) was the key exposure of interest.

resultsThe private facilities were less likely to have implants (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 0.06; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.03, 0.12), trained FP providers (AOR = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.41) and FP guidelines/protocols (AOR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.54) than public facilities but were more likely to have functional cell phones (AOR = 8.20; 95% CI: 4.95, 13.59) and water supply (AOR = 3.37; 95% CI: 1.72, 6.59).

conclusionThis study highlights the need for strengthening both private and public facilities for public-private partnerships to contribute to increased FP use and better health outcomes.

Indexed as

Family Planning ServicesPrimary Health CarePrivate FacilitiesAdolescentAdultChildCross-Sectional StudiesEthiopiaFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansQuality of Health CareSex EducationYoung AdultEthiopiafamily planningprimary health carepublic–private partnershipquality of services

Identifiers

PMID32545564
PMCPMC7345433
OpenAlexW3034965078

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.