Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42780915›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2026

Contraceptive ever-use among women of reproductive age in Northern Ghana: a comparative analysis of logistic regression, LASSO penalised regression, and random forest machine learning approaches.

Joseph Lasong, Mavis Kala, Torjim Salifu, Yula Salifu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Joseph LasongDepartment of Population and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.
Mavis KalaDepartment of Population and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.
Torjim SalifuDepartment of Population Family and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana.
Yula SalifuDepartment of Population and Reproductive Health, School of Public Health, University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Contraceptive uptake in Northern Ghana remains low despite high awareness, suggesting barriers not fully captured by additive models. This study compared logistic regression, LASSO, and Random Forest to predict contraceptive ever-use and identify determinants among women in Tamale Metropolis. Methods: A facility-based cross-sectional survey (January-April 2023) included 414 women aged 15-49 from three public health facilities. Outcome: contraceptive ever-use. Twelve predictors included knowledge/attitude scores, wealth tertile, education, parity, marital status, occupation, age, cultural barriers, health worker attitudes, and information source. Model discrimination was assessed via AUC with 95% CIs; LASSO used 10-fold cross-validation ( Results: Random Forest achieved highest discrimination (AUC=0.865, 95% CI:0.83-0.90), outperforming logistic regression (AUC=0.727) and LASSO (AUC=0.723) (both Conclusions: Random Forest provided better discrimination and may complement regression for prediction, though regression remains essential for interpretable effect estimates. Attitude change, education, and counselling quality are priority targets. The inverse wealth association warrants qualitative investigation, as polygyny, religiosity, and partner dynamics were unmeasured.

Indexed as

contraceptive usefamily planningLASSOmachine learningNorthern Ghanarandom forestwomen of reproductive age

Identifiers

PMID42780915
PMCPMC13597874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.