Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40542458›Full record

ArticleStudies in family planning2025

Meeting Contraceptive Preferences Among Low-Income Postpartum Texans: A Counterfactual Analysis of Pregnancy Trajectories.

Joseph E Potter, Kristen Lagasse Burke, Michelle A Eilers, Daniel A Powers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Studies in family planning, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Kristen Lagasse BurkeORCID 0000-0002-1833-3722
Michelle A Eilers
Daniel A Powers

Funding

Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Catherine A Calder · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
University of California, San Francisco/Kaiser Permanente Northern California Division of Research Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health (BIRCWH) K12 ProgramK12AR084219 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Monica Gandhi, CYNTHIA C HARPER · 2023 to 2026
$3.1M
NIAMS NIH HHS K12 AR084219NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many people at risk of an undesired pregnancy are not using their preferred contraceptive method. On its own, discordant use is an important indicator of reproductive autonomy. It may also affect reproductive outcomes, although little research has explored the consequences of unsatisfied contraceptive preferences. Using prospective data for the two years following delivery for a cohort of low-income postpartum women in Texas, many of whom would have preferred to be using a more effective method than the one they were using, we ask: How would the pregnancy trajectories of those not using their preferred contraceptive have differed had they been able to access their preferred method? Taking an inverse probability of treatment weighting approach, we show that using a preferred method was associated with half the likelihood of conceiving a pregnancy likely to result in a birth within 21 months postpartum (adjusted hazard ratio 0.43; 95 percent confidence interval 0.32, 0.57). Our findings highlight the consequences of failing to provide people with their preferred method and reveal how, in a context where people face substantial barriers to reproductive healthcare, discordant use increases the risk that people will have a baby that they did not desire at that time or, in some cases, ever.

Indexed as

ContraceptionContraception BehaviorPatient PreferencePostpartum PeriodPovertyAdultFemaleHumansPregnancyProspective StudiesTexasYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40542458
PMCPMC12501743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.