ArticleBMC public health2024
Intimate partner violence influences modern family planning use among married women in Tanzania: cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and factors associated with intimate partner violence among women in Tanzania: evidence from Tanzanian demographic and health survey 2022.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Enhancing Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Modern Temporary Family Planning Methods: A Nurse-Led Intervention Study among Reproductive-Age Women.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Intimate partner violence against women among contraceptive users at a primary health care setting in Southern Ethiopia: a facility-based cross-sectional study.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Factors Influencing Modern Family Planning Utilization and Barriers in Women of Reproductive Age in the Iringa Region, Tanzania: A Mixed-Methods Study.SAGE open nursingArticle
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
backgroundMarried women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV) are less likely to negotiate with their partners on modern family planning (FP) use. This study aimed to determine the influence of intimate partner violence and sociodemographics on modern family planning use.
methodsA community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the Mara region, Tanzania from April to July 2020. A total of 366 married women were interviewed. Data were collected using a structured interviewer-administered questionnaire. Analysis was done using SPSS version 25, and a binary logistic regression model was used to determine the predictors of modern FP use. The significance level was set at a p-value less than 0.05.
resultsThe overall prevalence of IPV was 73% with 54.1% physical, 36.3% psychological, and 25.4%, sexual violence. The prevalence of modern FP use was 62%, and the most (49.1%) common method practiced by married women was injection (Depo Provera). Physical violence (AOR = 0.32, p = 0.0056), and psychological violence (AOR = 0.22, p = 0.0022) had significantly reduced odds of modern FP use. Religion (AOR = 4.6, p = 0.0085), and availability of preferred modern FP methods (AOR = 9.27, p < 0.0001) had significantly increased odds of modern FP use.
conclusionIn this study, there is a positive association between the use of modern FP methods and IPV. To prevent IPV and its negative health consequences, it is crucial to involve community leaders and primary healthcare workers. They can help in identifying the best strategies to prevent IPV and promote the use of modern FP methods. It is equally important to involve male partners in reproductive health decisions, including the use of modern FP methods. This approach will help reduce reproductive coercion.
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.