Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38363778›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Women decision making on use of modern family planning methods and associated factors, evidence from PMA Ethiopia.

Fitsum Tariku Fantaye, Solomon Abrha Damtew

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
20.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fitsum Tariku FantayeFTF Research Consulting PLC, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.ORCID 0000-0003-1790-7269
Solomon Abrha DamtewDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Wolaita Sodo University, Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia.
Wolaita Sodo University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFamily planning decision making is defined as women´s ability to determine the family planning methods that she wanted to use through the process of informed decision making. Despite the availability and accessibility of family planning methods, the utilization rate is not more than 41% in Ethiopia. Evidence and experts have consistently show that women decisions making ability on family planning method they desired to use is one of the possible reasons for this slow rate of family planning use increment. In consideration of this and further motives family planning use decision making has become one of the top sexual and reproductive health related sustainable development agendas. Hence, this study aimed at determining the level, trend and spatial distribution of family planning use decision making among married women and identify factors affecting it.

methodsThis study was based on Performance Monitoring for Action (PMA) 2020 cross sectional national survey data. Married women who are currently using or recently used family planning method were included in this study. Frequency was computed to describe the study participants while chi-square statistics was computed to examine the overall association of independent variable with family planning use decision making. To identify predictors of family planning use decision making multinomial logistics regression was employed. Results were presented in the form of percentage and relative risk ratio with 95% CI. Candidate variables were selected using p value of 0.25. Significance was declared at p value 0.05.

resultsThis study revealed that one in two women (51.2%; 95% CI: 48.8%-53.6%) decide their family planning use by themselves while 37% (36.8%; 95% CI: 34.5%-39.2%) decide jointly with their husband and/or partner. Women alone family planning use decision making increased significantly 32.8% (95% CI: 29.4%, 36.4%) in 2014 to 51.2% (95% CI: 48.8%, 53.6%) in 2020. It also shows variation across regions from scanty in Afar and Somali to 63.6% in Amhara region and 61.5 Addis Ababa. Obtaining desired family planning method was found significantly to improve women alone and joint family planning use decision making. Women who have perceive control and feeling if they get pregnant now were found to be positively associated with women alone family planning use decision making. Discussion with husband, his feeling towards family planning were found positively to influence family planning use joint decision making. Moreover, women religion, was found reducing the likelihood of both women alone and joint family planning use decision making while experiencing side effect reduces the likelihood of joint family planning use decision making.

conclusionHalf of the women independently decide their family planning use which calls up on further improvement. Family planning use decision making ability is expected to be improved by efforts targeted on husbands' approval on wife's family planning use, discussion on family planning use with husband/partner, improving women psychosociological readiness and trust on her own to decide her desired family planning method; informing the possible side effects and what to do when they encountered during their family planning use visit. In addition, influencing women on the use of family planning via religious leader will help much in this regard. Monitoring and evaluating reproductive health policy 2021 to2025 and addressing bottlenecks which hinder women decision making health service use is hoped to improve women family planning use decision making. Further qualitative study to identify and address factors that contribute for the variation across regions also help much.

Indexed as

Contraception BehaviorFamily Planning ServicesCross-Sectional StudiesDecision MakingEthiopiaFemaleHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID38363778
PMCPMC10871506
OpenAlexW4391893334

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.