Meeting Preferences for Specific Contraceptive Methods: An Overdue Indicator.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Kristen Lagasse Burke, Joseph E Potter
{"title":"Meeting Preferences for Specific Contraceptive Methods: An Overdue Indicator.","authors":"Kristen Lagasse Burke,&nbsp;Joseph E Potter","doi":"10.1111/sifp.12218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fertility surveys have rarely asked people who are using contraception about the contraceptive method they would like to be using, implicitly assuming that those who are contracepting are using the method they want. In this commentary, we review evidence from a small but growing body of work that oftentimes indicates this assumption is untrue. Discordant contraceptive preferences and use are relatively common, and unsatisfied preferences are associated with higher rates of method discontinuation and subsequent pregnancy. We argue that there is opportunity to center autonomy and illuminate the need for and quality of services by building on this research and investing in the development of survey items that assess which method people would like to use, as well as their reasons for nonpreferred use. The widespread adoption of questions regarding method preferences could bring indicators of reproductive health services into closer alignment with the needs of the people they serve.</p>","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"54 1","pages":"281-300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12218","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: 2

Abstract

Fertility surveys have rarely asked people who are using contraception about the contraceptive method they would like to be using, implicitly assuming that those who are contracepting are using the method they want. In this commentary, we review evidence from a small but growing body of work that oftentimes indicates this assumption is untrue. Discordant contraceptive preferences and use are relatively common, and unsatisfied preferences are associated with higher rates of method discontinuation and subsequent pregnancy. We argue that there is opportunity to center autonomy and illuminate the need for and quality of services by building on this research and investing in the development of survey items that assess which method people would like to use, as well as their reasons for nonpreferred use. The widespread adoption of questions regarding method preferences could bring indicators of reproductive health services into closer alignment with the needs of the people they serve.

满足特定避孕方法的偏好:一个迟来的指标。
生育调查很少询问正在使用避孕措施的人他们希望使用的避孕方法,含蓄地假设正在使用避孕措施的人正在使用他们想要的方法。在这篇评论中,我们回顾了来自一个小而不断增长的工作体的证据,这些证据通常表明这种假设是不正确的。不一致的避孕偏好和使用是相对常见的,不满意的偏好与较高的方法终止率和随后的怀孕有关。我们认为,有机会集中自主权,并通过建立这项研究和投资于调查项目的开发来阐明对服务的需求和质量,这些调查项目可以评估人们喜欢使用哪种方法,以及他们不喜欢使用的原因。广泛采用关于方法偏好的问题,可使生殖健康服务的指标更符合它们所服务的人的需要。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信