Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40345366›Full record

ArticleContraception2025

Provider-imposed restrictions on contraceptive use in Western Kenya.

Stephanie Chung, Brooke Bullington, Emilia Goland, Dickens O Onyango, Leigh Senderowicz, Abigael Mwanyiro, Claire W Rothschild, Ben Wekesa, Brian Frizzelle, Ginger Golub and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

11 authors.

Stephanie ChungDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Contraceptive Research, Developement and Introduction, Global Health and Population, FHI 360, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: schung@fhi360.org.
Brooke BullingtonCarolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Emilia GolandDepartment of Maternal and Child Health, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Dickens O OnyangoDisease Surveillence and Response Unit, Kisumu County Department of Health, Kisumu, Kenya.
Leigh SenderowiczDepartment of Women and Gender Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Health Sciences Learning Center, Madison, WI, USA.
Abigael MwanyiroInnovations for Poverty Action-Kenya (IPA-K), Nairobi, Kenya.
Claire W RothschildDepartment of Sexual and Reproductive Health, Population Services International, Washington, DC, USA.
Ben WekesaInnovations for Poverty Action-Kenya (IPA-K), Nairobi, Kenya.
Brian FrizzelleCarolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Ginger GolubInnovations for Poverty Action-Kenya (IPA-K), Nairobi, Kenya.
Katherine TumlinsonCarolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

POPULATION STUDIEST32HD007168 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ELIZABETH A FRANKENBERG · 1985 to 2026
$13.8M
Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Training Program in Reproductive, Perinatal, and Pediatric EpidemiologyT32HD052468 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Julie L Daniels · 2008 to 2026
$3.8M
Randomized Controlled Trial to Address Unintended Pregnancy Rates in Low Resource SettingsR01HD101453 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI TUMLINSON, KATHERINE M · 2021 to 2025
$3.2M
Research Training Program in Reproductive and Sexual HealthR25HD115514 · NICHD · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI JESSICA N SANDERS, David Turok · 2024 to 2026
$474k
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD101453NICHD NIH HHS R25 HD115514NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007168NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD052468
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveContraceptive providers unnecessarily restrict contraceptive use or inappropriately apply medical eligibility criteria for a variety of reasons, including knowledge gaps, personal bias, or fear of legal or social consequences. As prevalence of these restrictions is unknown, this analysis aims to document current patterns of provider-imposed restrictions on contraceptive methods at public facilities in Western Kenya and assess novel questions on medical restrictions. STUDY

designWe surveyed 345 family planning providers across all 137 public healthcare facilities in Kisumu County, Kenya in 2022. The survey asked about non-clinically-indicated provider restrictions placed on six contraceptive methods, including sociodemographic and medical restrictions on contraceptive use. We use descriptive statistics to present the self-reported proportion of providers who impose incorrect sociodemographic or medical restrictions and use Chi-squared tests to explore associations with provider gender, age, time since last family planning training, and facility level.

resultsWe find that providers commonly imposed sociodemographic restrictions on female permanent contraception and intrauterine devices, with fewer providers inappropriately restricting women seeking oral contraceptive pills, implants, injections, or male condoms. Few providers reported accurately applying weight, blood pressure, or breastfeeding related medical eligibility criteria, with many inappropriately restricting hormonal methods. Weight was the most common reason for restriction, with 50% of providers reportedly applying inappropriate weight-based restrictions to oral contraceptive pills, 60% to injectables, and 40% to implants.

conclusionsProvider bias and inappropriate medical restrictions limit women's contraceptive choice in Kenya. More research is needed to address inappropriate provider restrictions, especially around patient age, weight, and partner consent. IMPLICATIONS: We find that providers are applying biased and/or inappropriate medical restrictions to contraceptive methods in Kisumu, Kenya, especially around patient weight. More research is needed to understand why many providers are applying medical eligibility criteria incorrectly, and how this impacts women's contraceptive choices.

Indexed as

ContraceptionContraception BehaviorFamily Planning ServicesHealth PersonnelAdultFemaleHumansKenyaMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultContraceptive service deliveryFamily planningKenyaMedical eligibility criteriaProvider bias

Identifiers

PMID40345366
PMCPMC12226224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.