ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
A reliable and valid tool to assess the sexual acceptability of contraceptive methods.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Adequate identification of the sexual acceptability of contraceptive methods is key for designing health promotion interventions, assessing their impacts, and increasing their effectiveness. This study aimed to develop and validate a questionnaire to explore the preferences of women depending on their epidemiological characteristics and their partner relationships-the Methods: Psychometric validation was conducted using Exploratory Factorial Analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The reliability of the final version of the questionnaire was explored using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald omega to estimate internal consistency. Results: A three-factor model was identified. Factor 1 (explaining 28.32% of the model) corresponds to questions concerning the use and placement of the contraceptive and includes 6 items; Factor 2 (explaining 24.23%) corresponds to other factors that affect the relationship such as bleeding and side effects of the contraceptive method and includes 10 items; and Factor 3 (explaining 18.94%) corresponds to the couple relationship and includes 8 items. Conclusion and implications: The ASMA questionnaire provides a valid and reliable tool for assessing the sexual acceptability of various contraceptive methods. This instrument gathers data that provide information on various aspects of women's sexuality, health, education, and beliefs, all of which can determine the preference for one contraceptive method over another. Moreover, the tool can help to identify profiles of women who have different preferences when selecting a particular method.
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.