ArticleHuman resources for health2022
Informal payments for modern family planning methods at public facilities in Tanzania: room for improvement.
Article in Human resources for health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Informal and out-of-pocket payments for public-sector contraceptive care in remote Madagascar.Contraception · 2026Article
- The nature, drivers and equity consequences of informal payments for maternal and child health care in primary health centres in Enugu, Nigeria.Health policy and planning · 2023Article
- Factors associated with modern contraceptive utilization among postpartum adolescent girls and young women in rural Mara, Tanzania: facility-based cross-sectional study.Therapeutic advances in reproductive healthArticle
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFinancial access to family planning (FP) is essential to the health and well-being of women in Tanzania. Tanzanian policy dictates that FP methods and services obtained at public facilities are provided for free. However, public sector FP is no longer free when providers solicit informal payments. In this analysis, we investigate the prevalence and amount of informal payments for FP in Tanzania.
methodsWe used data from the 2015-2016 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey to investigate whether informal payments for FP had been effectively eliminated by this policy.
resultsWe found that, at public sector facilities, the majority (84.6%) of women received their current FP method for free (95% confidence interval (CI): 81.9, 87.3), but this proportion varied meaningfully by facility and method type. Injectable contraception was the most commonly used method by women in the lowest wealth quintiles and was most frequently sought by these women from a government dispensary. One in four women (25.8%) seeking injectable contraception from government dispensaries reported paying a fee (95% CI: 19.5, 32.1). Among injectable users who reported payment for their current method, the mean cost at public sector facilities was 1420 Tanzanian Shillings (TSh) and the mean cost at private sector facilities was TSh 1930 (approximately 0.61 United States Dollars (USD) and 0.83 USD, respectively). Among implant users who reported payment for their current method, the mean cost at public sector facilities was TSh 4127 and the mean cost at private sector facilities was TSh 6194 (approximately 1.78 USD and 2.68 USD, respectively).
conclusionThese findings suggest that the majority of women visiting public facilities in Tanzania did not pay informal payments for FP methods or services; however, informal payments at public facilities did occur, varying by facility and method type. Adherence to existing policies mandating free FP methods and services at public facilities, especially government dispensaries, is critical for ensuring contraceptive access among the most economically vulnerable women.
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.