ArticlePLOS global public health2023
How a co-design process led to more contextually relevant family planning interventions in emerging urban settings in Eastern Uganda.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring co-design: a systematic review of concepts, processes, models, and frameworks used in public health research.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Modern contraceptive discontinuation and demand-and-supply-side method-mix in urban settings in Eastern Uganda: a mixed methods study.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2026Article
- Application of the ADAPT Framework to Contextualize a Participatory Learning and Action Community Intervention for the Prevention and Control of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Urban and Rural Settings in Afghanistan and Pakistan: Protocol for Intervention Adaptation.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Development of a community-based peer-support intervention to improve contraceptive agency and diffuse self-injectable contraception in Uganda: Application of the human-centered design approach.BMC women's health · 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
13 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Voluntary, rights-based family planning upholds women's right to determine freely the number and spacing of their children. However, low-resource settings like Uganda still face a high unmet need for family planning. And, while urban areas are often indicated to have better access to health services, emerging evidence is revealing intra-urban socio-economic differentials in family planning utilization. To address the barriers to contraceptive use in these settings, understanding community-specific challenges and involving them in tailored intervention design is crucial. This paper describes the use of co-design, a human-centred design tool, to develop context-specific interventions that promote voluntary family planning in urban settings in Eastern Uganda. A five-stage co-design approach was used: 1) Empathize: primary data was collected to understand the problem and people involved, 2) Define: findings were shared with 56 participants in a three-day in-person co-design workshop, including community members, family planning service providers and leaders, 3) Ideate: workshop participants generated potential solutions, 4) Prototype: participants prioritized prototypes, and 5) Testing: user feedback was sought about the prototypes. A package of ten interventions was developed. Five interventions targeted demand-side barriers to family planning uptake, four targeted supply-side barriers, and one addressed leadership and governance barriers. Involving a diverse group of co-creators provided varied experiences and expertise to develop the interventions. Participants expressed satisfaction with their involvement in finding solutions to challenges in their communities. However, power imbalances and language barriers were identified by the participants as potential barriers to positive group dynamics and discussion quality. To address them, participants were separated into groups, and medical terminologies were simplified during brainstorming sessions. These changes improved participation and maximized the contributions of all participants. It is therefore important to consider participant characteristics and their potential impact on the process, especially when engaging diverse participant groups, and implement measures to mitigate their effects.
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.