ArticleContraception: X2023
Evaluation of the London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy (LMUP) among a nationally representative sample of pregnant and postpartum women Ethiopia.
Article in Contraception: X, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response to "Evaluation of the LMUP in Ethiopia: Requirements, challenges and best practice".Contraception: X · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the LMUP in Ethiopia: Requirements, challenges and best practice.Contraception: X · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Rigorous measurement of pregnancy preferences is needed to address reproductive health needs. The London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy (LMUP), developed in the UK, has been adapted for low-income countries. Psychometric properties of LMUP items remain uncertain in contexts with limited access to and use of health services. Study design: This cross-sectional study examines the six-item LMUP's psychometric properties among a nationally representative sample of 2855 pregnant and postpartum women in Ethiopia. Principal components analysis (PCA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) estimated psychometric properties. Hypothesis testing examined associations between the LMUP and other measurement approaches of pregnancy preferences using descriptive statistics and linear regression. Results: The six-item LMUP had acceptable reliability (α = 0.77); two behavioral items (contraception, preconception care) were poorly correlated with the total scale. A four-item measure demonstrated higher reliability (α = 0.90). Construct validity via PCA and CFA indicated the four-item LMUP's unidimensionality and good model fit; all hypotheses related to the four-item LMUP and other measurement approaches were met. Conclusions: Measurement of women's pregnancy planning in Ethiopia may be improved through use of a four-item version of the LMUP scale. This measurement approach can inform family planning services to better align with women's reproductive goals. Implications: Improved pregnancy preference measures are needed to understand reproductive health needs. A four-item version of the LMUP is highly reliable in Ethiopia, offering a robust and concise metric for assessing women's orientations toward a current or recent pregnancy and tailoring care to support them in achieving their reproductive goals.
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.