ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2020
Rural-Urban Differentials of Long-Acting Contraceptive Method Utilization Among Reproductive-Age Women in Amhara Region, Ethiopia: Further Analysis of the 2016 EDHS.
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Women alone modern contraceptive use decision making and its correlates, evidence from PMA CS 2021 survey.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Women decision making on use of modern family planning methods and associated factors, evidence from PMA Ethiopia.PloS one · 2024Article
- Postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptives use in sub-Saharan Africa. Evidence from recent demographic and health surveys data.PloS one · 2023Article
- Women's empowerment indicators and short- and long-acting contraceptive method use: evidence from DHS from 11 countries.Reproductive health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe sharp fertility drop-off in the Amhara region between 2000 and 2011 was due to an increase in modern contraceptive utilization of rural women. However, long-acting contraceptive method utilization was higher among urban than rural women. Therefore, this study aimed to assess rural-urban differentials of long-acting contraceptive method utilization and the contributing factors among reproductive-age women in the Amhara region: analysis of the 2016 EDHS.
methodsThe 2016 EDHS data were used. A weighted sample of 2188 (1675 rural and 513 urban) fecund reproductive-age women was used, and a mixed-effects logistic regression model was fitted. Multivariable logistic regression analysis at a
resultsThe overall long-acting contraceptive method use was 13.3% (95% CI=11.6-15.8), and it was 14.8% (95% CI=12.4-17.2) among rural and 8.3% (95% CI=4.5-12.4) among urban women. Among urban women, the odds of long-acting contraceptive method use was higher for women living with a partner (AOR=6.83; 95% CI=1.23-37.84), married women (AOR=5.21; 95% CI=1.95-13.89), women living in a male-headed household (AOR=5.29; 95% CI=1.26-22.38), and women whose partner wanted fewer children (AOR=11; 95% CI=3.46-16.2). Among rural women, the odds of long-acting contraceptive use was higher for women in the richest wealth index (AOR=6.69; 95% CI=3.02-14.83), married women (AOR=30.26; 95% CI=8.81-42.9), women with good knowledge of LACMs (AOR=1.75; 95% CI=1.25-2.46), and women who had no correct knowledge of their ovulatory cycle (AOR=1.93; 95% CI=1.16-3.19).
conclusionLong-acting contraceptive method use was lower than the national target. LACM use was 8.3% (95% CI=4.5-12.4) among urban and 14.8% (95% CI=12.4-17.2) among rural women. Overall, marital status, educational level, the total number of children, knowledge of LACMs, and correct knowledge of the ovulatory cycle were significantly associated with LACM use.
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.