ArticleReproductive health2020
Validation of family planning tool in the pastoralist community.
Article in Reproductive health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of community-based interventions to promote family planning use among pastoralist women in Ethiopia: cluster randomized controlled trial.BMC women's health · 2021Trial
- Intention to use future contraception after abortion and associated factors among women visiting health facilities in Debre Markos town, Northwest Ethiopia, 2024.SAGE open medicine · 2026Article
- Trends and determinants of high-risk fertility in Ethiopia from 2011 to 2019 using spatial and decomposition analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Agency in Family Planning: A Scoping Review of the Measurement of Agency in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPastoralist community, Afar, women felt that they are embedded in strong cultural and religious perspectives which promotes a high number of children, and discourages family planning (FP) use. They are multifaced factors which hinder women not to use FP and it is time to develop a context-based tool to understand the situation at the ground. However, we have a dearth of evidence on a reliable and valid tool. Therefore, this study aims in developing a reliable and valid tool that considers the women's knowledge, male involvement, attitude, and belief about whether most people approve or disapprove of the behavior to use or not use of FP.
methodsA total of 891 married women participated in the study. Reviewing the literature, piloting, pretesting, and collecting the actual data were the steps we used to develop a reliable and valid tool. We used the integrated behavioral model (IBM) as a conceptual framework for developing the tool. The developing tool consists of 1) knowledge 2) perceived male involvement and 3) constructs of integrated behavioral model (IBM); expressional and instrumental attitude, subjective norm, self-efficacy, perceived control and intention to use of FP. The IBM items composed of direct and indirect measurement. In the analysis of the data, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was done. Independent t. test with cohen's d was used to calculate the effect size. The correlation coefficient was carried between the direct and indirect measurements of the items of the integrated behavioral model (IBM).
resultsA total of 891 pastoralist married women were included in the analysis of the reliability and validity of the tool. The mean age of the participants was 26.74(±6.45). The KMO value for all items was greater than 0.83 with a Bartlett test of sphericity of (p < 0.00). Thirteen items were used to measure the knowledge of the respondent towards FP use. The tool had 64.92 variances explained and Cronbach alpha of 0.85. Acceptable values of the fitness indices were obtained in the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) The items of knowledge towards FP had normed chi-square of 4.5, RMSEA with 90% CI of 0.064(0.056,.0.071), SRMR of 0.039, CFI of 0.969 and TLI of 0961. All the developed items had a Cohen's d ranges from 0.5 to 2. Moreover, the correlation test of the IBM ranges from 0.6 to 0.7 which shows a higher correlation between the measurement direct and indirect items.
conclusionThe pastoralist community version of the FP questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool and can be used to measure future family planning use. The indirect measurement of the IBM constructs was a good item to measure FP. However, as a limitation of the study respondents may face difficulty in realizing the difference one item to another especially when items on the scale look so similar to her.
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.