ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2023
Exploring Upward and Downward Provider Biases in Family Planning: The Case of Parity.
Article in Global health, science and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postpartum Intrauterine Device Removal and Access to Removal in the 18 Months Following an Intervention in Tanzania, Sri Lanka, and Nepal.Studies in family planning · 2026Trial
- Assessing the association between a postpartum intrauterine device intervention and perceived pressure to adopt contraception in Sri Lanka.Contraception · 2026Trial
- Family planning high impact practices in Francophone West Africa: ownership, strategies and use for programming.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Operationalizing Client-Centered Care: A Strategic Framework and Measurement Approach to Guide Sexual and Reproductive Health Programming.Global health, science and practice · 2025Article
- Healthcare provider perspectives on their role in perpetrating and perpetuating reproductive coercion: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Piloting measures of provider-imposed contraceptive coercion among reproductive-aged contraceptive users in Kisumu, Kenya: a cross-sectional, population-based study.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Measuring Informed Choice for Contraception in Burkina Faso: Comparing self-rated and researcher-ascribed measures.Social indicators research · 2025Article
- Provider-imposed restrictions on contraceptive use in Western Kenya.Contraception · 2025Article
- Readiness of health facilities to deliver family planning services and associated factors in urban east-central Uganda.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- The association of patient and clinician demographics and concordance with medicaid sterilization consent form validity.Journal of the National Medical Association · 2025Article
- Patient Perspectives on Clinician Support When Pursuing Permanent Contraception in the United States.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- Longitudinal impact of past-year reproductive coercion on contraceptive use dynamics in Sub-Saharan Africa: evidence from eight population-based cohorts.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Asymmetry in contraceptive information at two sites in Burkina Faso.AJOG global reports · 2024Article
- Person-centered contraceptive counseling and associations with contraceptive practices among a nationally representative sample of women in Ethiopia.Contraception: X · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionProvider bias has become an important topic of family planning research over the past several decades. Much existing research on provider bias has focused on the ways providers restrict access to contraception. Here, we propose a distinction between the classical "downward" provider bias that discourages contraceptive use and a new conception of "upward" provider bias that occurs when providers pressure or encourage clients to adopt contraception.
methodsUsing cross-sectional data from reproductive-aged women in Burkina Faso, we describe lifetime prevalence of experiencing provider encouragement to use contraception due to provider perceptions of high parity (a type of upward provider bias) and provider discouragement from using contraception due to provider perceptions of low parity (a type of downward provider bias). We also examine associations between sociodemographic characteristics and experiences of provider encouragement to use contraception due to perceptions of high parity.
resultsSixteen percent of participants reported that a provider had encouraged them to use contraception due to provider perceptions of high parity, and 1% of participants reported that a provider had discouraged them from using contraception because of provider perceptions of low parity. Being married, being from the rural site, having higher parity, and having attended the 45th-day postpartum check-up were associated with increased odds of being encouraged to use contraception due to provider perceptions of high parity.
conclusionWe find that experiences of upward provider bias linked to provider perceptions of high parity were considerably more common in this setting than downward provider bias linked to perceptions of low parity. Research into the mechanisms through which upward provider bias operates and how it may be mitigated is imperative to promote contraceptive autonomy.
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.