ArticleBMJ open2026
Closing the counselling gap: a qualitative study to strengthen rights-based family planning in Pakistan.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06081842 (Strengthening Contraceptive Counseling Services, a Multi-country Study Trial), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Strengthening Contraceptive Counseling Services, a Multi-country Study Trial
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify client and provider perspectives on contraceptive counselling in Pakistan and inform the development of an effective, rights-based counselling intervention package.
designA formative, multimethod qualitative study was conducted using in-depth interviews, non-participant observations of counselling encounters and thematic analysis. The study was embedded within a WHO-led multiphase complex intervention.
settingPrimary care-level family planning facilities (public and private) in the urban and peri-urban districts of Islamabad and Rawalpindi.
participantsThe analysis reported in this paper includes 72 married family planning clients (36 women and 36 men), 15 frontline healthcare providers and 72 observed counselling sessions across three facilities. Broader stakeholder interviews with programme managers, public-sector officials and donor/development partners were collected for the wider multiphase study but are not analysed in this paper.
resultsThree overarching themes were identified: (1) counselling was often understood as basic method-related information rather than a structured, rights-based decision-making process; (2) public and private facilities differed in counselling depth, method choice, privacy and use of visual/couple-centred approaches; and (3) system constraints, including time pressure, commodity limitations, limited follow-up mechanisms, weak privacy arrangements and inconsistent training, shaped the quality of counselling. Observation data supported interview findings by showing variation in privacy, side-effect discussion, client engagement and follow-up advice across facilities.
conclusionsFindings from participating facilities suggest that the current counselling model in these settings inadequately supports informed, autonomous reproductive choices. A redesigned, context-sensitive counselling package is needed to address these gaps. This should be supported by improved training, supportive supervision, inclusive tools, systemic reforms and enhanced follow-up mechanisms that are essential to increase decision-making autonomy and contraceptive continuation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06081842.
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.