Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38022103›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Why Pakistani Women Do Not Use Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices: A Systematic Review of Barriers and Misconceptions.

Waseem Sajjad, Khadija Ishaq, Sunaina Asghar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Waseem SajjadDepartment of Community Medicine and Public Health, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, PAK.
Khadija IshaqDepartment of Community Medicine and Public Health, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, PAK.
Sunaina AsgharDepartment of Community Medicine and Public Health, Mayo Hospital, Lahore, PAK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review explores barriers limiting the adoption of Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices (IUCDs) in Pakistan, focusing exclusively on local articles. As Pakistan's high population calls for widespread contraception, we aim to pinpoint obstacles hindering IUCD utilization, irrespective of parity. We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Google Scholar, PakMedinet, and Wiley Online Library for English-language primary studies published between 2000 and 2022, reporting on IUCD utilization in Pakistan. Our analysis reveals multiple barriers impeding IUCD use in Pakistan. These encompass patriarchal social norms, male dominance, low education, socioeconomic status, and unemployment. Post-insertion health concerns, inadequate counseling, government commitment, and awareness were also identified barriers. Provider confidence, client trust, women's autonomy, social constraints, and limited male partner involvement hindered IUCD adoption. A desire for larger families and male offspring, vague religious beliefs, fear, and misconceptions further restricted usage. Accessibility and high service costs also posed challenges. This review highlights prevailing impediments to IUCD adoption in Pakistan, encompassing knowledge gaps, motivation deficits, resistance from husbands and in-laws, cultural and religious beliefs, limited access, and communication barriers. To promote IUCDs as a modern contraceptive method, it is essential to raise awareness among both men and women. Active involvement of religious leaders and community stakeholders is crucial in addressing these social factors hindering IUCD utilization.

Indexed as

community health concernscontraceptionectopic pregnancyfamily planning methodsintrauterine contraceptive devicesmaternal health

Identifiers

PMID38022103
PMCPMC10657553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.