ArticlePloS one2023
Primary and reproductive healthcare access and use among reproductive aged women and female family planning patients in 3 states.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Invisible Burden: Examining the Impact of Exposure Misclassification in Epidemiologic Analyses of Uterine Fibroids.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2026Article
- Advancing Equitable, Person-Centered Contraceptive Care Using Data-Driven Quality Improvement.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2026Article
- Perception, Pattern of Use, and Determinants of Family Planning Uptake Among Women of Childbearing Age in Ibadan, South West Nigeria.International journal of MCH and AIDS · 2026Review
- Family planning under sociocultural influence: evaluating knowledge, access, and utilization in Al Baha, Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Contraceptive care and method use by sexual and gender minority status: insights from a longitudinal panel of sexual and reproductive healthcare patients in Wisconsin.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
- Relationship between experiencing a challenge or delay accessing contraception and contraceptive self-efficacy: Data from a 2022 nationally representative online survey.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Reproductive health at crossroads: progress and challenges since the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo.China population and development studies · 2025Article
- Article
- Intrauterine Device Use and Perceptions Among Women in Tanzania-A Mixed Methods Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public funding plays a key role in reducing cost barriers to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care in the United States. In this analysis, we examine sociodemographic and healthcare seeking profiles of individuals in three states where public funding for health services has recently changed: Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin. In addition, we examine associations between individuals' health insurance status and whether they experienced delays or had trouble in obtaining their preferred contraception. This descriptive study draws on data collected between 2018 to 2021 in two distinct cross-sectional surveys in each state, one among a representative sample of female residents aged 18-44 and the other among a representative sample of female patients ages eighteen and older seeking family planning services at healthcare sites that receive public funding to deliver this care. The majority of reproductive-aged women and female family planning patients across states reported having a personal healthcare provider, had received at least one SRH service in the preceding 12 months, and were using a method of birth control. Between 49-81% across groups reported receiving recent person-centered contraceptive care. At least one-fifth of each group reported wanting healthcare in the past year but not getting it, and between 10-19% reported a delay or trouble getting birth control in the past 12 months. Common reasons for these outcomes involved cost and insurance-related issues, as well as logistical ones. Among all populations except Wisconsin family planning clinic patients, those with no health insurance had greater odds of being delayed or having trouble getting desired birth control in the past 12 months than those with health insurance. These data serve as a baseline to monitor access and use of SRH services in Arizona, Wisconsin, Iowa in the wake of drastic family planning funding shifts that changed the availability and capacity of the family planning service infrastructure across the country. Continuing to monitor these SRH metrics is critical to understand the potential effect of current political shifts.
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.