Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32550524›Full record

ArticleContraception: X2019

Patterns and trends in contraceptive use among women attending Title X clinics and a national sample of low-income women.

Christina I Fowler, Katherine A Ahrens, Emily Decker, Julia Gable, Jiantong Wang, Brittni Frederiksen, Ana Carolina Loyola Briceño, Susan B Moskosky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception: X, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Christina I FowlerRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA 27709.
Katherine A AhrensUS Office of Population Affairs, 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC, USA 20201.
Emily DeckerUS Office of Population Affairs, 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC, USA 20201.
Julia GableRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA 27709.
Jiantong WangRTI International, 3040 E. Cornwallis Road, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA 27709.
Brittni FrederiksenUS Office of Population Affairs, 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC, USA 20201.
Ana Carolina Loyola BriceñoUS Office of Population Affairs, 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC, USA 20201.
Susan B MoskoskyUS Office of Population Affairs, 200 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC, USA 20201.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the types of contraception used by women attending Title X-funded clinics and a comparable group of low-income reproductive-age women at risk of unintended pregnancy. STUDY

designWe estimated the percentage of reproductive aged (15-44 years) women using contraception, by method type and level of effectiveness in preventing pregnancy (i.e., most, moderately, and less effective), using Title X Family Planning Annual Report (2006-2016) and National Survey of Family Growth (2006-2015) data. We divided most effective methods into permanent (female and male sterilization) and reversible (long-acting reversible contraceptives [LARCs]) methods.

resultsAmong Title X clients during 2006-2016, use of LARCs increased (3-14%); use of moderately effective methods decreased (64-54%); and use of sterilization (~ 2%), less effective methods (21-20%), and no method (8-7%) was unchanged. These same trends in contraceptive use were observed in a comparable group of women nationally during 2006-2015, during which LARC use increased (5-19%, p < .001); moderately effective method use decreased (60-48%, p < .001); and use of sterilization (~5%), less effective methods (19%), and no method (11-10%) was unchanged.

conclusionsThe contraceptive method mix among Title X clients differs from that of low-income women at risk of unintended pregnancy nationally, but general patterns and trends are similar in the two populations. Research is needed to understand whether method use patterns among low-income women reflect their preferences, access, or the conditions of the supply environment. IMPLICATIONS: This study contributes to our understanding of patterns and trends in contraceptive use among two groups of reproductive-age women - Title X clients and low-income women nationally who are at risk of unintended pregnancy. The findings highlight areas for further research.

Indexed as

ContraceptionPublicly funded family planningTitle XUnintended pregnancyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID32550524
PMCPMC7286153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.