ArticleBMC public health2025
Determinants of family planning services uptake among women within the reproductive age in the Yendi municipality in Northern Ghana.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. 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 Qualitative Study on Youth and Healthcare Provider Perspectives on Youth Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services in Northern Ghana: Implications for a Peer-Led Intervention.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Why are so many pregnancies still unintended in Ghana? A closer look at factors influencing reproductive autonomy.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study investigated the prevalence and determinants of family planning services uptake among women of reproductive age (15 to 49 years) in the Yendi municipality in the northern region of Ghana. A health facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 396 reproductive-aged women, sampled from 6 randomly selected health facilities in the Yendi municipality. The child welfare clinic (CWC) served as the point for the sampling of study respondents. Data was collected with questionnaires adapted from previously validated tools. Data was analysed using SPSS v27 in descriptive and inferential statistics. More than half of the respondents (54.3%) said they had ever used a family planning method and almost half of them said they were still using a family planning method. The desire to control pregnancy was a key factor for wanting family planning (79.3%). Most respondents (80.6%) had high knowledge of family planning services and injectables (37.1%) and condoms (24.7%) were the preferred family planning methods. The significant sociodemographic determinants of family planning uptake were religion (Christians (aOR: 7.51; 95%CI: 1.48-38.00:; p = 0.015), traditionalist (aOR: 12.1; 95%CI: 1.90-78.36; p = 0.009)), education (secondary education (aOR: 84.99; 95%CI: 20.02-360.84:; p = 0.000), tertiary education (aOR: 158.74; 95%CI: 33.71-747.52; p = 0.000), no formal education (aOR: 11.83; 95%CI: 2.10-46.76:; p = 0.000)), occupation (farmers (aOR: 12.30; 95%CI: 3.21-47.03; p = 0.000)), and marital status (married (aOR: 0.13; 95%CI: 0.03-0.57; p = 0.007)). Factors that made women less likely to use family planning were unfriendly service providers (aOR: 2.33; 95%CI: 1.28-4.21; p = 0.005), fear of side effects (aOR: 2.19; 95%CI: 1.19-4.05; p = 0.012), and lack of knowledge about available FP services (aOR: 0.45; 95%CI: 0.26-0.77; p = 0.004). Though the knowledge of family planning was high, current uptake of family planning services was modest and there are still sociodemographic and health-related barriers to family planning utilization. Highlighting the need for training programs and policy interventions to improve uptake, reduce financial barriers, and foster a supportive environment.
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.