ArticlePLOS global public health2024
What does your partner want? Using a gender equality lens to assess partner support and involvement in family planning in Uganda.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Theory of Planned Behaviour Analysis of Barriers and Facilitators of Immediate Postpartum Contraception Uptake in Southwestern Uganda.Open access journal of contraception · 2026Article
- Prevalence of postpartum family planning uptake and its association with couples' joint decision-making: a community-based cross-sectional study in rural Sindh, Pakistan.BMJ public 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is unclear if there are any differences in the ways men and women perceive partner support in the context of family planning. The USAID-funded Social and Behavior Change Activity (SBCA) in Uganda explored male versus female priorities in the decision-making considerations and preferred measures of partner support related to family planning. Data were from a cross -sectional nationally representative telephone survey of 1177 men and women aged 18-49 years old in sexual partnerships. Key measures included current family planning use (Are you or your partner currently doing anything to prevent or delay becoming pregnant?); family planning decision-making considerations (In your experience, which of the following are the three most important considerations as you make family planning decisions?); and preferred partner support (What level of involvement would you like to see from your partner in your family planning decisions?). Multivariable logistic regressions explored factors associated with decision-making priorities and preferred partner support, adjusting for sociodemographic confounders. Two-thirds (66%) of men and women wanted a high level of involvement from their partner, which was associated with higher odds of using family planning (aOR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.87-3.24). Specific ways partners could be involved included accompanying them to health services (39%), permitting them to get family planning services (26%), and jointly discussing family planning options (23%). Of note, more women wanted their partner to accompany them (45%) than men (33%) while more men (29%) wanted to jointly discuss options than women (15%). Social and behavior change interventions should operationalize partner support differently for men and women. Study findings were used to implement a health campaign that explicitly encouraged partner dialogue and support across the various life stages; empowering women with knowledge and skills to have honest conversations with their partners about birth spacing and timing.
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.