ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2021
Advancing Rights-Based Family Planning from 2020 to 2030.
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality matters: the role of service quality in discontinuation of long-acting reversible contraceptives in Sub-Saharan Africa; systematic review and meta-analysis.Reproductive health · 2025Pooled it
- 'Global health action · 2026Observational
- Closing the counselling gap: a qualitative study to strengthen rights-based family planning in Pakistan.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Factors influencing preference for short-term over long-term contraceptives among women in northern Uganda. A mixed-methods study.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Policy in practice: assessing Senegal's family planning progress using a mixed-methods approach.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- When choice is not performative: the struggle for agency among women accessing family planning services in Senegal.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Article
- Describing the roles of civil society organizations in sustaining adolescents' family planning programs in nine Asian and African countries.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Review
- Contraceptive Concordance.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Article
- Socio-structural influences on unintended pregnancy among girls aged 15-17 years in Papua New Guinea.BMJ global health · 2025Article
- Article
- Exploring intimacy and family planning in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: a qualitative study.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- PrEP Method Switching: Will it Yield Greater Coverage of HIV Protection? Applying Lessons Learned from Family Planning to Guide Future Research in the Context of PrEP Choice.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2024Review
- Acceptability of an on-demand pericoital oral contraceptive pill: a systematic scoping review.Reproductive health · 2024Article
- Balancing client preferences and population-level goals: a qualitative study of the ways in which public health providers and facility administrators interpret and incentivise quality of care in contraceptive counselling in Ethiopia, Mexico and India.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2023Article
- Article
- Exploring and Monitoring Privacy, Confidentiality, and Provider Bias in Sexual and Reproductive Health Service Provision to Young People: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAn assessment in 2019 by Family Planning 2020 of progress on rights-based family planning since 2012 highlighted the development of tools and guidelines that identify and explain rights in relation to family planning, promotion of rights-based approaches to programing, strengthened accountability, and measurement of rights-focused outcomes. The assessment was also forward-looking, asking what aspects of rights-based family planning still need attention moving from 2020 to 2030.
methodsThis paper draws on interviews with 23 key informants from governments, civil society, and youth focused organizations, implementing partners, and bi-lateral and multilateral organizations from Africa, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and North America, all working on family planning and engaged in various roles with the FP2020 partnership at global and national levels, along with documentation of FP2030 partnership plans. The interviews were conducted as part of the assessment and included questions to respondents for their recommendations on rights-based family planning moving towards 2030.
resultsRespondents agreed that rights should be at the center of the vision for family planning, with attention to rights literacy, accountability and equity, including adolescent and youth leadership. They noted the need for consistent political and financial support, and incorporating rights into result-based financing programming. While respondents noted the need for development and dissemination of practical tools and training materials, along with rights metrics and implementation research, they stressed the importance of focusing work on rights at the country level. Respondents also acknowledged that institutionalizing rights-based family planning will require enhanced commitment and funding from both donors and countries to ensure programming - and success - over the long term. Amplifying civil society and particularly adolescent and youth voices will be key to engaging governments to support both rights-based programming and provide funding. Review of initial planning under FP2030 related to each of the recommendations suggests that the new partnership is seeking to addressing each of them. DISCUSSION: As the family planning field looks beyond 2020 to 2030, this paper provides a roadmap for building on the gains made over the past decade to effectively tackle the challenges remaining to ensure that programming to achieve the vision of the FP2030 Partnership is rights-based.
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.