ArticleJournal of primary care & community health
How do Specialists Address Contraceptive Care Compared to General Practitioners in a Federally Qualified Health Center in Maryland.
Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine associations between primary provider specialty and the contraceptive care that patients receive in a Federally Qualified Health Center setting in Maryland.
methodsA study of reproductive-age patients and their providers was performed from January 2018 to December 2021. A pooled crosssectional survey of electronic medical record data for 44 127 encounters of 22 828 patients was performed to calculate the odds of contraceptive care being addressed by patients who had General Practitioner, OB/GYN, pediatrician, or infectious disease (ID) specialists as their primary providers.
resultsIn 19 041 encounters (43%), contraception was addressed through either counseling alone, documentation of a contraceptive prescription, or long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) placement procedure. After adjusting for insurance status and race/ethnicity, the odds ratio (OR) of contraceptive care delivery was statistically significantly higher for OB/GYN providers compared to General Practitioners-OR 2.42 (CI 2.29-2.53) and statistically significantly lower for ID providers-OR 0.69 (CI 0.61-0.79). There was a non-statistically significant difference for Pediatricians-OR 0.88 (CI 0.77-1.01).
conclusionThe provision of contraceptive care, a critical aspect of comprehensive primary care delivered in an FQHC setting, varies by provider specialty, and may be negatively influenced by Ryan White funding related structures. There is a need to intentionally design robust referral and tracking systems to ensure contraceptive care is equitably accessible to all, regardless of assigned primary care provider specialty or HIV status.
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.