ArticleReproductive health2025
Assessing knowledge and utilization of female condoms among undergraduate female students at Makerere University, Kampala: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Reproductive health, 2025. 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.
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practice gap in female condoms utilization among future health professionals. A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in reproductive 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite the effectiveness of female condoms (FCs) in preventing sexually transmitted infections, their use remains low. University students, at high risk for unsafe sex, need targeted interventions. This study assessed knowledge and utilization among female undergraduates to inform policies and strategies for improving accessibility and uptake in higher education institutions.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 246 undergraduate female students at Makerere University in March-April 2023. Participants were selected using simple random sampling. Data were collected through a structured, self-administered questionnaire covering demographic characteristics, FC knowledge, utilization, and barriers to use. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, while logistic regression identified factors associated with FC knowledge and utilization.
resultsOf the 246 participants, the mean age was approximately 25.8 years ± 4.6. While 76.8% had heard of female condoms, mainly through fellow female students (39.4%), only 10.6% reported having ever used one. Barriers included a perceived lack of flexibility (73.6%), insertion difficulties (56.5%), and inaccessibility (17.5%). Third-year students had significantly higher odds of FC knowledge than first years (aOR = 7.10, 95% CI: 2.12-23.73, p = 0.001). Compared to Protestants, Catholic participants were less likely to be knowledgeable about female condoms (aOR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.10-0.74, p = 0.011). Similarly, participants from category, other religions also showed significantly lower knowledge (aOR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.01-0.56, p = 0.014). Married students had significantly higher odds of FC use than single students (aOR = 6.25, 95% CI: 2.26-17.27, p = 0.000). Fourth-year students showed higher odds of FC use in bivariate analysis (OR = 6.29, 95% CI: 1.05-37.57, p = 0.044), but this was not significant in multivariable analysis (aOR = 1.95, 95% CI: 0.25-15.22, p = 0.525).
conclusionThe study showed significant gaps in knowledge and utilization of female condoms among undergraduate female students. Barriers included inaccessibility, difficulty of use, and religious beliefs. A comprehensive sexual health education through integrating family planning clinics and seminars, collaborations between universities and health organizations, and tailored interventions are needed to improve awareness, acceptance, and utilization of female condoms.
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.