ArticleScientific reports2023
Spatial variation in the non-use of modern contraception and its predictors in Bangladesh.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring Geographic Inequalities and Determinants of Contraceptive Use Among Married Adolescent Girls in Bangladesh: Findings from the 2019-20 Adolescent Health Survey.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Spatial variations and determinants of modern contraceptive use among postpartum women in Sub-Saharan Africa: analysis of recent DHS data (2015-2023).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Disparities in contraceptive preferences among Bangladeshi women: a multilevel logistic regression study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Association between women's empowerment and use of modern contraception methods in Bangladesh: evidence from Bangladesh demographic and health survey 2022.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate spatial variations in the non-use of modern contraception in Bangladesh and identify associated individual, household, and community-level factors. The analysis utilized data from 16,135 women, extracted from the 2017/18 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey. The study's main outcome was the prevalence of non-use of modern contraception (yes or no), while the explanatory variables included factors at the individual, household, and community level. To assess geographical heterogeneity in non-use of modern contraception, Moran's I statistics were applied. Additionally, the Gettis-Ord Gi* was calculated to measure spatial autocorrelation differences across various study locations. The relationship between non-use of modern contraception and location was further explored using a geographically weighted regression model at the cluster level. The results indicated that 42.8% (95% CI 41.6-43.8) of respondents reported non-use of modern contraception in Bangladesh, with significant variation across geographical locations (p < 0.001). Hot spots of high non-use were predominantly identified in the Sylhet, Barishal, and some areas of the Chattogram divisions, while cold spots of low use were concentrated in the Rangpur, Mymensingh, and some areas Rajshahi divisions. Notably, the likelihood of non-use was highest among women and partners with low levels of education. The analysis of other risk factors, such as partner occupation, community-level illiteracy, and poverty, revealed varying effects on non-use of modern contraception across different locations (clusters) within the country. The study's findings underscore the importance of targeted, area-specific policies and programs aimed at promoting knowledge and uptake of modern contraception in Bangladesh.
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.