朝向以人为中心的避孕需求测量:对避孕药具使用意图和实际使用之间关系的系统审查。

Gates Open Research Pub Date : 2025-02-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.12688/gatesopenres.15078.3
Victoria Boydell, Kelsey Quinn Wright, Shatha Elnakib, Christine Galavotti
{"title":"朝向以人为中心的避孕需求测量:对避孕药具使用意图和实际使用之间关系的系统审查。","authors":"Victoria Boydell, Kelsey Quinn Wright, Shatha Elnakib, Christine Galavotti","doi":"10.12688/gatesopenres.15078.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding people's interest in using modern contraception is critical to ensuring programs align with people's preferences and needs. Current measures of demand for contraception are misinterpreted. More direct measures of intention to use (ITU) contraception do exist but remain underexplored. This systematic review examines the relationship between intention to use and actual use of contraception.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Collaboration to identify studies published from 1975-2020 that: (1) examined contraceptive behaviour, (2) included measures of ITU and future contraceptive use, and (3) included at least one quantitative measure of association between ITU and actual use. The inclusion criteria were: 1) examined contraceptive behaviour (excluding condom use only), (2) included disaggregated integral measures of ITU contraceptives and later contraceptive use, (3) included at least one quantitative measure of the association between ITU contraceptives and actual contraceptive use, (4) study population was women of reproductive age, (5) were peer-reviewed, and (6) written in English.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>10 prospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria; these provided 28,749 person-years of data (N=10,925). Although we could pool the data for unadjusted odds ratios, a metanalysis was not possible. We calculated that 6 of the 10 studies indicated significant, increased, unadjusted odds of subsequent contraceptive use after reporting ITU. Of those, 3 study analyses reported significant, positive adjusted odds ratios for the relationship between intention to use and later contraceptive use across varying covariates. The range of confounding factors, particularly around sub-populations, points to the need for more research so that a meta-analysis can be done in the future.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People's self-reported ITU contraception has the potential to be a strong predictor of subsequent contraceptive use. Few studies directly examined the relationship between ITU and contraceptive uptake and recruitment was primarily pregnant or postpartum samples.</p>","PeriodicalId":12593,"journal":{"name":"Gates Open Research","volume":"8 ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11634881/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Toward person-centred measures of contraceptive demand: a systematic review of the relationship between intentions to use and actual use of contraception.\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Boydell, Kelsey Quinn Wright, Shatha Elnakib, Christine Galavotti\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/gatesopenres.15078.3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding people's interest in using modern contraception is critical to ensuring programs align with people's preferences and needs. Current measures of demand for contraception are misinterpreted. More direct measures of intention to use (ITU) contraception do exist but remain underexplored. This systematic review examines the relationship between intention to use and actual use of contraception.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Collaboration to identify studies published from 1975-2020 that: (1) examined contraceptive behaviour, (2) included measures of ITU and future contraceptive use, and (3) included at least one quantitative measure of association between ITU and actual use. The inclusion criteria were: 1) examined contraceptive behaviour (excluding condom use only), (2) included disaggregated integral measures of ITU contraceptives and later contraceptive use, (3) included at least one quantitative measure of the association between ITU contraceptives and actual contraceptive use, (4) study population was women of reproductive age, (5) were peer-reviewed, and (6) written in English.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>10 prospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria; these provided 28,749 person-years of data (N=10,925). Although we could pool the data for unadjusted odds ratios, a metanalysis was not possible. We calculated that 6 of the 10 studies indicated significant, increased, unadjusted odds of subsequent contraceptive use after reporting ITU. Of those, 3 study analyses reported significant, positive adjusted odds ratios for the relationship between intention to use and later contraceptive use across varying covariates. The range of confounding factors, particularly around sub-populations, points to the need for more research so that a meta-analysis can be done in the future.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People's self-reported ITU contraception has the potential to be a strong predictor of subsequent contraceptive use. Few studies directly examined the relationship between ITU and contraceptive uptake and recruitment was primarily pregnant or postpartum samples.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gates Open Research\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"1\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11634881/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gates Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.15078.3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gates Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.15078.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:了解人们对使用现代避孕的兴趣对于确保项目符合人们的偏好和需求至关重要。目前避孕需求的衡量标准被误解了。使用(国际电联)避孕意向的更直接措施确实存在,但仍未得到充分探索。本系统综述探讨了避孕意图和实际使用之间的关系。方法:我们检索了PubMed、PsycInfo、Web of Science和Cochrane Collaboration,以确定1975-2020年间发表的研究:(1)检查了避孕行为,(2)包括国际电联和未来避孕措施的使用措施,(3)包括至少一项国际电联和实际使用之间关联的定量措施。纳入标准是:1)检查避孕行为(不包括仅使用安全套),(2)包括国际电联避孕措施和后来避孕措施使用的分类综合措施,(3)包括至少一项国际电联避孕措施与实际避孕措施使用之间关联的定量措施,(4)研究人群为育龄妇女,(5)经过同行评审,(6)以英文撰写。结果:10项前瞻性队列研究符合纳入标准;这些提供了28,749人年的数据(N=10,925)。虽然我们可以汇总未经调整的优势比数据,但不可能进行荟萃分析。我们计算出,10项研究中有6项表明,在向国际电联报告后,随后使用避孕药具的几率显著增加,且未经调整。其中,3项研究分析报告了在不同协变量中,使用避孕药的意图与后来使用避孕药之间的关系具有显著的正校正比值比。混杂因素的范围,特别是围绕亚人群的因素,表明需要进行更多的研究,以便将来进行荟萃分析。结论:人们自我报告的国际电联避孕有可能成为随后使用避孕措施的有力预测指标。很少有研究直接审查国际电联与避孕药具摄取和招募之间的关系,主要是孕妇或产后抽样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Toward person-centred measures of contraceptive demand: a systematic review of the relationship between intentions to use and actual use of contraception.

Background: Understanding people's interest in using modern contraception is critical to ensuring programs align with people's preferences and needs. Current measures of demand for contraception are misinterpreted. More direct measures of intention to use (ITU) contraception do exist but remain underexplored. This systematic review examines the relationship between intention to use and actual use of contraception.

Methods: We searched PubMed, PsycInfo, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Collaboration to identify studies published from 1975-2020 that: (1) examined contraceptive behaviour, (2) included measures of ITU and future contraceptive use, and (3) included at least one quantitative measure of association between ITU and actual use. The inclusion criteria were: 1) examined contraceptive behaviour (excluding condom use only), (2) included disaggregated integral measures of ITU contraceptives and later contraceptive use, (3) included at least one quantitative measure of the association between ITU contraceptives and actual contraceptive use, (4) study population was women of reproductive age, (5) were peer-reviewed, and (6) written in English.

Results: 10 prospective cohort studies met the inclusion criteria; these provided 28,749 person-years of data (N=10,925). Although we could pool the data for unadjusted odds ratios, a metanalysis was not possible. We calculated that 6 of the 10 studies indicated significant, increased, unadjusted odds of subsequent contraceptive use after reporting ITU. Of those, 3 study analyses reported significant, positive adjusted odds ratios for the relationship between intention to use and later contraceptive use across varying covariates. The range of confounding factors, particularly around sub-populations, points to the need for more research so that a meta-analysis can be done in the future.

Conclusions: People's self-reported ITU contraception has the potential to be a strong predictor of subsequent contraceptive use. Few studies directly examined the relationship between ITU and contraceptive uptake and recruitment was primarily pregnant or postpartum samples.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gates Open Research
Gates Open Research Immunology and Microbiology-Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
×
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