Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37195714›Full record

ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2023

Prevalence of non-preferred family planning methods among reproductive-aged women in Burkina Faso: results from a cross-sectional, population-based study.

Brooke W Bullington, Nathalie Sawadogo, Katherine Tumlinson, Ana Langer, Abdramane Soura, Pascal Zabre, Ali Sie, Leigh Senderowicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. "Women's health (London, England)
    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.

Brooke W BullingtonPhD Student, Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, USA.
Nathalie SawadogoSenior Lecturer, Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Population, Université Joseph Ki-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Katherine TumlinsonFaculty Fellow, Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Ana LangerProfessor of the Practice of Public Health, Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston MA, USA.
Abdramane SouraDirector, Institut Supérieur des Sciences de la Population, Université Joseph Ki-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Pascal ZabreDemographer, Head of HDSS, Centre de Recherche en Santé de Nouna, Nouna, Burkina Faso.
Ali SieDirector, Centre de Recherche en Santé de Nouna, Nouna, Burkina Faso.
Leigh SenderowiczAlumna, Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston MA, USA.

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 MASSEY, DOUGLAS S · 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

Family planning researchers have traditionally focused efforts on understanding contraceptive non-use and promoting contraceptive uptake. Recently, however, more scholars have been exploring method dissatisfaction, questioning the assumption that contraceptive users necessarily have their needs met. Here, we introduce the concept of "non-preferred method use", which we define as the use of one contraceptive method while having the desire to use a different method. Non-preferred method use reflects barriers to contraceptive autonomy and may contribute to method discontinuation. We use survey data collected from 2017 to 2018 to better understand non-preferred contraceptive method use among 1210 reproductive-aged family planning users in Burkina Faso. We operationalise non-preferred method use as both (1) use of a method that was not the user's original preference and (2) use of a method while reporting preference for another method. Using these two approaches, we describe the prevalence of non-preferred method use, reasons for using non-preferred methods, and patterns in non-preferred method use by current and preferred methods. We find that 7% of respondents reported using a method they did not desire at the time of adoption, 33% would use a different method if they could and 37% report at least one form of non-preferred method use. Many women cite facility-level barriers, such as providers refusing to give them their preferred method, as reasons for non-preferred method use. The high prevalence of non-preferred method use reflects the obstacles that women face when attempting to fulfil their contraceptive desires. Further research on reasons for use of non-preferred methods is necessary to promote contraceptive autonomy.

Indexed as

Contraceptive AgentsFamily Planning ServicesAdultBurkina FasoContraception BehaviorCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansPrevalenceContraceptive Agentscontraceptive autonomyfamily planningmethod dissatisfactionnon-preferred method usereproductive health

Identifiers

PMID37195714
PMCPMC10193871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.