Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35351446›Full record

ArticleContraception2022

Contraceptive decisions among individuals with medical conditions in Michigan, USA: A qualitative explanatory model informed by the Health Belief Model and the principle of respect for patient autonomy.

Justine P Wu, Emily Johnson, L Susan Taichman

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Justine P WuDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States; Michigan Mixed Methods Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States. Electronic address: justinep@med.umich.edu.
Emily JohnsonDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
L Susan TaichmanDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, United States.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002242 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI HOLINSTAT, MICHAEL ALLAN · 2017 to 2021
$2.8M
Improving Contraceptive Care for Women with Chronic Conditions: A Novel, Web-Based Decision Aid in Primary CareK23HD084744 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI WU, JUSTINE P · 2017 to 2021
$842k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002242NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD084744
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe aimed to qualitatively describe the contraceptive experiences of individuals with medical conditions and develop an explanatory model of contraceptive decision-making in this context. STUDY

designWe conducted 41 interviews with pre-menopausal patients with a range of medical conditions from Michigan, United States. We identified themes through open coding and comparative analysis until we reached theoretical saturation. We analyzed the themes in the context of the Health Belief Model constructs and patient autonomy. To develop the explanatory model, we qualitatively mapped out relationships between constructs and how they informed contraceptive-decision making.

resultsThe model posits that contraceptive decisions are affected by the perceived impact of chronic disease on pregnancy, parenting, and contraceptive options. These perceptions were strongly affected by others, particularly health care providers (HCPs). Most worried that pregnancy could threaten their health, fetal health, or ability to parent. Active symptoms of chronic disease (e.g., pain, fatigue) amplified this perceived threat. Patients appreciated when their HCPs acknowledged, rather than dismissed, their concerns about contraceptive side effects that affected their chronic disease symptoms and management (e.g., headaches, worsening mood). Patients with medical contraindications to hormonal contraception and preferred to use coital-dependent methods (e.g., condoms) did not feel supported to do so by their HCPs. Patients who were Black, young, living on low-incomes, or considered medically "high risk" felt discriminated against by HCPs who limited or coerced their contraceptive decisions.

conclusionsThis explanatory model synthesizes factors that underlie, constrain, or promote reproductive and contraceptive decisions and autonomy for individuals with medical conditions. IMPLICATIONS: This new explanatory model can guide the development and evaluation of interventions that support the contraceptive decisions and autonomy of individuals with medical conditions.

Indexed as

ContraceptionContraceptive AgentsChronic DiseaseFemaleHealth Belief ModelHumansMichiganPregnancyContraceptive AgentsChronic diseaseContraceptionContraceptive behaviorContraceptive decision-makingHealth Belief ModelMedical conditionsQualitative research

Identifiers

PMID35351446
PMCPMC13334569
OpenAlexW4220830565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.