我们如何衡量避孕方法的偏好?范围审查的证据。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Carolina Cardona,Jamila Asker,Emily Sanchez,Philip Anglewicz
{"title":"我们如何衡量避孕方法的偏好?范围审查的证据。","authors":"Carolina Cardona,Jamila Asker,Emily Sanchez,Philip Anglewicz","doi":"10.1111/sifp.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the growing interest in person-centered measures for family planning and the importance of reproductive preferences, little is known about the measurement of contraceptive preferences. Population surveys have implicitly assumed that contracepting people have achieved their method of choice. In this scoping review, we explored how contraceptive method preferences have been defined and measured in different settings. We included 55 articles focused on measuring people's preferred method of contraception or preferred attributes of contraception. Thirty-seven articles were conducted in high-income countries (HIC), five in upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), and thirteen in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Sixteen articles measured preferences for specific methods of contraception, 36 measured the preferred attributes of contraceptive methods, and three implemented both approaches. Four articles used consistent language to measure the preferred method of contraception, although many used synonyms of \"preferences,\" and some constrained their questions to method availability or cost. The measurement of preferred attributes of contraception varied across articles, even within similar contexts and populations. Key attributes included side effects, effectiveness, and cost. Our results highlight the increasing interest in understanding contraceptive preferences, but gaps remain in developing best practices. This is critical as the family planning field moves toward person-centered metrics that emphasize individual choice.","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Do We Measure Contraceptive Method Preferences? Evidence From a Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Cardona,Jamila Asker,Emily Sanchez,Philip Anglewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sifp.70034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite the growing interest in person-centered measures for family planning and the importance of reproductive preferences, little is known about the measurement of contraceptive preferences. Population surveys have implicitly assumed that contracepting people have achieved their method of choice. In this scoping review, we explored how contraceptive method preferences have been defined and measured in different settings. We included 55 articles focused on measuring people's preferred method of contraception or preferred attributes of contraception. Thirty-seven articles were conducted in high-income countries (HIC), five in upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), and thirteen in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Sixteen articles measured preferences for specific methods of contraception, 36 measured the preferred attributes of contraceptive methods, and three implemented both approaches. Four articles used consistent language to measure the preferred method of contraception, although many used synonyms of \\\"preferences,\\\" and some constrained their questions to method availability or cost. The measurement of preferred attributes of contraception varied across articles, even within similar contexts and populations. Key attributes included side effects, effectiveness, and cost. Our results highlight the increasing interest in understanding contraceptive preferences, but gaps remain in developing best practices. This is critical as the family planning field moves toward person-centered metrics that emphasize individual choice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-14\",\"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.70034\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.70034","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

摘要

尽管人们对以人为中心的计划生育措施和生育偏好的重要性越来越感兴趣,但对避孕偏好的测量知之甚少。人口调查含蓄地假定避孕的人已经达到了他们所选择的方法。在这个范围审查,我们探讨如何避孕方法的偏好已经定义和测量在不同的设置。我们纳入了55篇文章,重点是测量人们首选的避孕方法或首选的避孕属性。37篇文章在高收入国家(HIC)进行,5篇在中高收入国家(UMIC)进行,13篇在中低收入国家(LMIC)进行。16篇文章测量了对特定避孕方法的偏好,36篇文章测量了避孕方法的首选属性,3篇文章采用了两种方法。四篇文章使用了一致的语言来衡量首选的避孕方法,尽管许多文章使用了“偏好”的同义词,有些文章将问题限制在方法的可用性或成本上。即使在相似的背景和人群中,对避孕首选属性的测量也因文章而异。关键属性包括副作用、有效性和成本。我们的研究结果强调了人们对了解避孕偏好的兴趣日益增加,但在制定最佳做法方面仍存在差距。随着计划生育领域转向强调个人选择的以人为中心的指标,这一点至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Do We Measure Contraceptive Method Preferences? Evidence From a Scoping Review.
Despite the growing interest in person-centered measures for family planning and the importance of reproductive preferences, little is known about the measurement of contraceptive preferences. Population surveys have implicitly assumed that contracepting people have achieved their method of choice. In this scoping review, we explored how contraceptive method preferences have been defined and measured in different settings. We included 55 articles focused on measuring people's preferred method of contraception or preferred attributes of contraception. Thirty-seven articles were conducted in high-income countries (HIC), five in upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), and thirteen in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Sixteen articles measured preferences for specific methods of contraception, 36 measured the preferred attributes of contraceptive methods, and three implemented both approaches. Four articles used consistent language to measure the preferred method of contraception, although many used synonyms of "preferences," and some constrained their questions to method availability or cost. The measurement of preferred attributes of contraception varied across articles, even within similar contexts and populations. Key attributes included side effects, effectiveness, and cost. Our results highlight the increasing interest in understanding contraceptive preferences, but gaps remain in developing best practices. This is critical as the family planning field moves toward person-centered metrics that emphasize individual choice.
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
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