ArticlePloS one2022
Factors associated with modern contraceptive use among men in Pakistan: Evidence from Pakistan demographic and health survey 2017-18.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sociodemographic factors associated with modern contraceptive use in Japan: an analysis of national survey data.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Association of men's contraceptive knowledge, attitude and behavior with modern contraceptive use: evidence from Nepal demographic health survey 2022.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Determinants of men's perspectives on women contraceptive use in Ghana: an analysis of the 2022 Ghana demographic and health survey.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Effect modification of socioeconomic status in the association between contraception methods and couple's education: A secondary analysis of PDHS 2017-18.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Factors that influence modern contraceptive use among women aged 35 to 49 years and their male partners in Gomoa West District, Ghana: a qualitative study.Tropical medicine and health · 2023Article
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe role of men in family planning is critical in patriarchal societies like Pakistan. The objective of this study is to explore the predictors of modern contraceptive use among Pakistani men.
methodsThis study is a secondary analysis of Pakistan demographic and health survey (PDHS) 2017-18 data. The study sample consists of 3691 ever married men aged 15-49 years. Pearson's chi square test and logistic regression were used to find out the determinants of modern contraceptive use among men. Data analysis was carried out in December, 2020.
resultsFindings of logistic regression showed that men who were uneducated (aOR = 0.746; 95% CI = 0.568-0.980), residing in Sindh (aOR = 0.748; 95% CI = 0.568-0.985), Baluchistan (aOR = 0.421; 95% CI = 0.280-0.632) or FATA (aOR 0.313; 95% CI 0.176-0.556) and those who belonged to the poorest wealth quintile (aOR = 0.569; 95% CI = 0.382-0.846) were less likely to use modern contraceptives. Men who did not wish for another child (aOR = 2.821; 95% CI = 2.305-3.451) had a higher likelihood of modern contraceptive use. Finally, men who thought that contraception was women's business (aOR = 0.670; 95% CI = 0.526-0.853) and those who did not discuss family planning with health worker (aOR = 0.715; 95% CI = 0.559-0.914) were also less likely to use modern contraceptives.
conclusionReproductive health education of males, targeting males, in addition to, females for addressing family planning issues and improvement of family planning facilities in socioeconomically under-privileged regions are suggested to improve contraceptive use among couples.
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.