ArticleAJOG global reports2024
Asymmetry in contraceptive information at two sites in Burkina Faso.
Article in AJOG global reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Family planning programs are foundationally important to public health, but like any medical intervention, contraception has drawbacks in addition to its benefits. Knowledge of these drawbacks in addition to benefits is essential for informed choice. Despite a general consensus among family planning researchers and providers that contraceptive counseling should be unbiased, little quantitative research has assessed the extent of bias in contraceptive counseling, and in people's contraceptive knowledge more broadly. Objective: To understand the extent to which women report being told more about the advantages of contraception than the disadvantages-a concept we call "asymmetry" in contraceptive counseling, at two research sites in Burkina Faso. Methods: We use data from a cross-sectional population-based survey of 3,929 women residing in the catchment areas of the Ouagadougou (urban) and the Nouna (rural) Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems in Burkina Faso. We use descriptive statistics to explore asymmetry in knowledge of the benefits/advantages and risks/disadvantages of contraceptive use overall, as well as method-specific asymmetry among current method users regarding their counseling experience. Findings: Results show substantial asymmetry in knowledge of advantages/benefits of contraception compared to disadvantages/risks. 86% of respondents said they could name any advantage of family planning, while half of that proportion (43%) could name any disadvantage. We find a similarly stark asymmetry in method-specific results among contraceptive users, especially for hormonal/biomedical methods. We also find substantial variation between research sites, with urban respondents much less likely to self-report complete family planning knowledge than their rural counterparts. Conclusion: Our results suggest that family planning messaging in Burkina Faso may place an emphasis on the advantages without a commensurate focus on disadvantages. Family planning programs worldwide must ensure that people can make informed choices based on balanced, accurate information about both the benefits and the disadvantages of contraception.
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.