ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2022
Developing an Assessment of Contraceptive Preferences in Botswana: Piloting a Novel Approach Using Best-Worst Scaling of Attributes.
Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using best-worst scaling to inform policy decisions in Africa: a literature review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: To develop an attribute-based method for assessing patient contraceptive preferences in Botswana and pilot its use to explore the relationship between patient contraceptive preferences and the contraceptive methods provided or recommended to patients by clinicians. Methods: A list of contraceptive attributes was developed with input from patients, clinicians, and other stakeholders. We assessed patient preferences for attributes of contraceptives using a discrete choice "best-worst scaling" approach and a multi-attribute decision-making method that linked patient attribute preferences to actual contraceptive method characteristics. Attribute-based patient method preferences and clinician recommendations were compared in 100 women seeking contraceptive services, and 19 clinicians who provided their care. For 41 of the patients, the short-term reliability of their preference scores was also examined. Results: For 57 patients who wanted more children in the future, the degree of concordance between patients and clinicians was 7% when comparing the top attribute-based contraceptive preference for each woman with the clinician-provided/recommended method. When the top two model-based preferred contraceptive methods were considered, concordance was 28%. For 43 women who did not want more children, concordance was 0% when using the patient's model-based "most-preferred" method, and 14% when considering the top two methods. Assessment of the short-term reliability of preference scores yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.93. Conclusions: A best-worst scaling assessment of attributes of contraceptives was designed and piloted in Botswana as a Contraceptive Preference Assessment Tool. The preference assessment was found to have high short-term reliability, which supports its potential use as a measurement tool. There was very low concordance between women's attribute-based contraceptive preferences and their clinician's provision/recommendations of contraceptive methods. Using such a preference assessment tool could encourage greater patient involvement and more tailored discussion in contraceptive consultations.
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.