Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36444203›Full record

ArticleAJOG global reports2022

Facility readiness to remove subdermal contraceptive implants in 6 sub-Saharan African countries.

Leigh Senderowicz, Celia Karp, Brooke W Bullington, Katherine Tumlinson, Linnea Zimmerman, Funmilola M OlaOlorun, Musa Sani Zakirai, Performance Monitoring for Action Principal Investigators Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AJOG global reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors.

Leigh SenderowiczDepartments of Gender and Women's Studies and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI (Dr Senderowicz).
Celia KarpDepartment of Population, Family, and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD (Drs Karp and Zimmerman).
Brooke W BullingtonDepartments of Epidemiology (Ms Bullington).
Katherine TumlinsonMaternal and Child Health (Dr Tumlinson), Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Linnea ZimmermanDepartment of Population, Family, and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD (Drs Karp and Zimmerman).
Funmilola M OlaOlorunCollege of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria (Dr OlaOlorun).
Musa Sani ZakiraiNational Population Commission, Abuja, Nigeria (Dr Zakirai).
Performance Monitoring for Action Principal Investigators Group

Funding

Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Health Disparities Research Scholars Training Program-RenewalT32HD049302 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Maureen S Durkin · 2007 to 2026
$5.6M
Scientific and Technical CoreP2CHD047873 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Katherine J. Curtis · 2014 to 2026
$5.1M
Training Program in Reproductive, Perinatal, and Pediatric EpidemiologyT32HD052468 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Julie L Daniels · 2008 to 2026
$3.8M
Scientific and Technical Computing CoreP2CHD047879 · NICHD · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI SALGANIK, MATTHEW J. · 2014 to 2018
$2.0M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD047873NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD047879NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD049302NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD052468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to estimate the proportion of health facilities without the capability to remove contraceptive implants and those that have the capability to insert them and to understand facility-level barriers to implant removal across 6 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. STUDY

designUsing facility data from the Performance Monitoring for Action in Burkina Faso, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, and Uganda from 2020, we examined the extent to which implant-providing facilities (1) lacked necessary supplies to remove implants, (2) did not have a provider trained to remove implants onsite, (3) could not remove deeply placed implants onsite, and (4) reported any of the above barriers to implant removal. We calculated the proportion of facilities that report each barrier, stratifying by facility type.

resultsBetween 31% and 58% of implant-providing facilities reported at least 1 barrier to implant removal in each country (6 sub-Saharan African countries). Lack of trained providers was the least common barrier to implant removal (0%-17% of facilities), whereas lack of supplies (17%-44% of facilities) and the inability to remove a deeply placed implant (16%-42%) represented more common obstacles to removal. Blades and forceps were commonly missing supplies across all 6 countries. Barriers to implant removal were less commonly reported at hospitals than at lower-level facilities in all countries except Burkina Faso.

conclusionThis multicountry analysis showed that facility-level barriers to contraceptive implant removal are widespread among facilities that offer implant insertion. By preventing users from being able to discontinue their implants on request, these barriers pose a threat to contraceptive autonomy and reproductive health.

Indexed as

contraceptive implantsFacility-readinessfamily planninghealth systemsLARC removalreproductive healthwomen's health

Identifiers

PMID36444203
PMCPMC9700317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.