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

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Joseph E Potter,Kristen Lagasse Burke,Michelle A Eilers,Daniel A Powers
{"title":"Meeting Contraceptive Preferences Among Low-Income Postpartum Texans: A Counterfactual Analysis of Pregnancy Trajectories.","authors":"Joseph E Potter,Kristen Lagasse Burke,Michelle A Eilers,Daniel A Powers","doi":"10.1111/sifp.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.70020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.
满足低收入产后德克萨斯人的避孕偏好:怀孕轨迹的反事实分析。
许多有意外怀孕风险的人没有使用他们首选的避孕方法。就其本身而言,不和谐的使用是生殖自主的一个重要指标。它也可能影响生殖结果,尽管很少有研究探讨不满意的避孕偏好的后果。使用对德克萨斯州低收入产后妇女分娩后两年的前瞻性数据,其中许多人更愿意使用比他们正在使用的更有效的方法,我们问:如果他们能够使用他们首选的避孕方法,那些没有使用他们首选的避孕方法的怀孕轨迹会有什么不同?采用治疗加权的逆概率方法,我们发现使用首选方法与产后21个月内分娩的怀孕可能性的一半相关(校正风险比0.43;95%置信区间0.32,0.57)。我们的研究结果强调了未能向人们提供他们喜欢的方法的后果,并揭示了在人们面临生殖保健方面的重大障碍的情况下,不协调的使用如何增加了人们当时或在某些情况下生下他们不想要的孩子的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
9.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Studies in Family Planning publishes public health, social science, and biomedical research concerning sexual and reproductive health, fertility, and family planning, with a primary focus on developing countries. Each issue contains original research articles, reports, a commentary, book reviews, and a data section with findings for individual countries from the Demographic and Health Surveys.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信