ArticleContraception: X2022
Associations between unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost and low-income patients' access to and experiences of contraceptive care in the United States, 2015-2019.
Article in Contraception: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Text Message Delivery of a Digital Tool for Reproductive Health Discussions in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Contraceptive use and unfulfilled preferences among women ages 15-49 years in the United States, 2022-2023.F&S reports · 2026Article
- Alleviating price and information barriers to long-acting contraception uptake in Kenyan pharmacies using patient and provider incentives: a cluster randomized control trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Contraceptive care and method use by sexual and gender minority status: insights from a longitudinal panel of sexual and reproductive healthcare patients in Wisconsin.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
- Adolescents' and Young Adults' Receipt of Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Racial/Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities of Contraceptive Preference-Use Match in the United States.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- Maternal sociodemographic characteristics of short and long interpregnancy intervals in Japan: an analysis using national birth data.BMC public health · 2025Article
- How Do We Measure Contraceptive Method Preferences? Evidence From a Scoping Review.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Meeting Contraceptive Preferences Among Low-Income Postpartum Texans: A Counterfactual Analysis of Pregnancy Trajectories.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Relationship between experiencing a challenge or delay accessing contraception and contraceptive self-efficacy: Data from a 2022 nationally representative online survey.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Etonogestrel Subdermal Implant in Adolescents: Everything We Should Know to Conduct Proper Counseling, a Narrative Review.Clinics and practice · 2025Review
- Patient Preferences or Provider Pressure? The Relationship Between Coercive Contraceptive Care and Preferred Contraceptive Use.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Exploring primary care physician biases in adolescent contraceptive counseling.Contraception · 2025Article
- Exploring adolescent-facing US clinicians' perceptions of their contraceptive counseling and use of shared decision-making: A qualitative study.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2024Article
- Determining the Impact of the Reversal of Roe v. Wade on Birth Control and Infertility Trends Using Google Trends.Cureus · 2024Article
- Use of Preferred Source of Contraception Among Users of the Pill, Patch, and Ring in the US.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Integrating Sexual and Reproductive Health Equity Into Public Health Goals and Metrics: Comparative Analysis of Healthy People 2030's Approach and a Person-Centered Approach to Contraceptive Access Using Population-Based Data.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- Unfulfilled and method-specific contraceptive preferences among reproductive-aged contraceptive users in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey, and Wisconsin.Health services research · 2024Observational
- Changes in contraceptive method mix following the Colorado Family Planning Initiative.Contraception · 2024Article
- Documentation of prenatal contraceptive counseling and fulfillment of permanent contraception: a retrospective cohort study.Reproductive health · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To identify prevalence of unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost among low-income United States female contraceptive method users and nonusers, and associations between access to, and experience with, contraceptive care and this outcome. Methods: We drew on data from the 2015-2019 National Surveys of Family Growth to conduct simple and multivariable logistic regression analyses on unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost among nationally representative samples of low-income women ages 15 to 49 who were current contraceptive users ( Results: Overall, 23% of female contraceptive users reported they would use a different method, and 39% of nonusers reported they would start using a method, if cost were not an issue. Controlling for user characteristics, low-income contraceptive users who received recent publicly supported contraceptive care reported significantly higher levels of unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost than those without any access to SRH care (aOR = 1.6, CI 1.0-2.5), while having private (aOR = 0.6, CI 0.4-0.9) or public (aOR = 0.7, CI 0.5-1.0) health insurance was associated with significantly lower levels of this outcome. Nonusers of contraception who had recently received publicly supported contraceptive care also reported marginally higher levels of this outcome (aOR = 2.2, CI 1.0-5.1). Contraceptive users who received recent person-centered contraceptive counseling had marginally lower odds of unfulfilled contraceptive preferences due to cost (aOR = 0.6, CI 0.4-1.0). Conclusions: Cost is a barrier to using preferred contraception for both contraceptive users and nonusers; health insurance coverage and person-centered contraceptive counseling may help contraceptive users to overcome cost barriers and realize their contraceptive preferences. Implications: Factors related to contraceptive access at the systems level-specifically the subsidization and experience of contraceptive care-impact whether cost serves as a barrier to individuals' contraceptive preferences. Delivery of patient-centered care and shoring up health insurance coverage for all can help to mitigate cost barriers and enable individuals to realize their contraceptive preferences.
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.