ArticleContraception2021
Patient and counselor satisfaction with structured contraceptive counseling by health center staff in federally qualified health centers.
Article in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo characterize patient and counselor satisfaction with structured, tier-based contraceptive counseling provided by a nonclinician. STUDY
designWe conducted a planned secondary analysis of patient and counselor surveys from a study that enrolled women in 2 contraceptive care programs. All participants received structured contraceptive counseling from trained staff members. Women and counselors completed a confidential post-visit survey regarding satisfaction with counseling and medical mistrust. We used univariate and multivariable regressions to examine differences in high satisfaction with counseling (top score), perceived counselor influence, and perceived counselor judgment by participant characteristics.
resultsNine hundred forty-two participants completed surveys; most reported they felt respected (100.0%), trusted the counseling information (99.5%), and that counseling helped them choose a contraceptive method (83.8%). Black race, high school education, public insurance, an income below the federal poverty level, and enrollment site were associated with high medical mistrust. Participants with high medical mistrust were less likely to be highly satisfied with counseling (adjusted relative risk (RR) 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.82), more likely to perceive influence (RR 1.77; 95% CI 1.37-2.28), and more likely to perceive judgment (adjusted odds ratio 8.91; 95% CI 3.61-22.01). Mostly, counselors felt they were able to answer participant questions (98.8%), establish good rapport (95.9%), and that participants understood the information presented (98.0%).
conclusionsOverall, participants were satisfied with tier-based contraceptive counseling delivered by nonclinician staff members. Those with high levels of medical mistrust were less likely to be satisfied. The majority of women found the information beneficial in contraceptive decision making. IMPLICATIONS: Overall, women reported high satisfaction with tier-based contraceptive counseling delivered by a nonclinician in 3 federally qualified health centers. However, women with high medical mistrust were less likely to report high levels of satisfaction and more likely to report perceived influence or judgment from the counselor.
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.