Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35222602›Full record

SynthesisAfrican health sciences2021

Systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the knowledge and use of the female condom among Nigerians.

Philemon Dauda Shallie, Firoza Haffejee

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in African health sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Philemon Dauda ShallieDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Durban University of Technology, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
Firoza HaffejeeDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, Durban University of Technology, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
Durban University of Technology · ZAOlabisi Onabanjo University · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe female condom (FC) is a critical component in a comprehensive and sustainable approach to prevent HIV, other sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancies.

objectivesThis review provides comprehensive information about Nigerian's knowledge and use of FC.

methodsWe screened search output, evaluated study eligibility, and extracted data in duplicate. Data from similar studies were combined in a meta-analysis.

resultsThere was a significantly (p < 0.0001) high-level of awareness amongst the respondents. However, the use of the FC was very low at 5.5% among female respondents. There was a significant (p < 0.0001) difference between FC awareness and use. The main reasons for FC use were prevention of unintended pregnancy (55%) and STIs/HIV (31%). We observed a significant difference between reasons of non-use of the FC [F (5, 13) = 5.195, P = 0.0077]. Furthermore, there were significant differences between the sources of information on FC [F (3, 8) = 32.89, P < 0.0001].

conclusionDespite the high levels of awareness, especially among the female respondents, the use of the FC has remained extremely low even among the young, educated undergraduate students. There is aneed for robust and consistent advocacy to make the FC available and affordable.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSexually Transmitted DiseasesSingle-Use Internal CondomCondomsFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansNigeriaPregnancyPregnancy, UnplannedawarenessFemale condommenNigeriausewomen

Identifiers

PMID35222602
PMCPMC8843269
OpenAlexW3204740262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.