Suzanne O Bell, Georges Guiella, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Fiacre Bazie, Yentema Onadja, Saifuddin Ahmed, Caroline Moreau
{"title":"布基纳法索基于社会网络的人工流产发生率估算:检验网络生成问题的影响。","authors":"Suzanne O Bell, Georges Guiella, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Fiacre Bazie, Yentema Onadja, Saifuddin Ahmed, Caroline Moreau","doi":"10.1111/sifp.12213","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Social network-based methods are increasingly used to estimate induced abortion incidence and investigate correlates. Approaches differ in the social tie definitions used to identify which social network members' abortion experiences respondents will report. This study compares the effect of using the \"best friend\" (closest female friend) versus \"confidante\" (specifying mutual sharing of personal information) definition on abortion incidence estimation. We use data from a nationally representative survey of women aged 15-49 in Burkina Faso (conducted in 2020-2021) where respondents were randomized into two versions of an abortion module, using different friend definitions. We computed abortion rate estimates by friend definition and adjusted for assumption violations (transmission bias, surrogate sample selection bias). Unadjusted incidence rates varied from 11.7 [4.1-19.2] abortions per 1,000 women to 15.6 [9.7-21.4], depending on friend definition. The confidante definition yielded higher adjusted estimates (36.2 [25.1-47.2]) than the best friend definition (17.0 [8.7-25.3]) due to greater transmission bias adjustment. Both estimates exceeded the respondent self-reported abortion incidence (4.0 [2.2-5.9]). Our results indicate that either friend definition produces higher incidence estimates than self-report but suggest a potential advantage for the \"best friend\" over the \"confidante\" definition given lower transmission bias. Further research should assess generalizability of these findings in other contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"53 4","pages":"639-655"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092449/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Network-Based Induced Abortion Incidence Estimation in Burkina Faso: Examining the Impact of the Network Generating Question.\",\"authors\":\"Suzanne O Bell, Georges Guiella, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Fiacre Bazie, Yentema Onadja, Saifuddin Ahmed, Caroline Moreau\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sifp.12213\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Social network-based methods are increasingly used to estimate induced abortion incidence and investigate correlates. Approaches differ in the social tie definitions used to identify which social network members' abortion experiences respondents will report. This study compares the effect of using the \\\"best friend\\\" (closest female friend) versus \\\"confidante\\\" (specifying mutual sharing of personal information) definition on abortion incidence estimation. We use data from a nationally representative survey of women aged 15-49 in Burkina Faso (conducted in 2020-2021) where respondents were randomized into two versions of an abortion module, using different friend definitions. We computed abortion rate estimates by friend definition and adjusted for assumption violations (transmission bias, surrogate sample selection bias). Unadjusted incidence rates varied from 11.7 [4.1-19.2] abortions per 1,000 women to 15.6 [9.7-21.4], depending on friend definition. The confidante definition yielded higher adjusted estimates (36.2 [25.1-47.2]) than the best friend definition (17.0 [8.7-25.3]) due to greater transmission bias adjustment. Both estimates exceeded the respondent self-reported abortion incidence (4.0 [2.2-5.9]). Our results indicate that either friend definition produces higher incidence estimates than self-report but suggest a potential advantage for the \\\"best friend\\\" over the \\\"confidante\\\" definition given lower transmission bias. Further research should assess generalizability of these findings in other contexts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"volume\":\"53 4\",\"pages\":\"639-655\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092449/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12213\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/10/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"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.12213","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Social Network-Based Induced Abortion Incidence Estimation in Burkina Faso: Examining the Impact of the Network Generating Question.
Social network-based methods are increasingly used to estimate induced abortion incidence and investigate correlates. Approaches differ in the social tie definitions used to identify which social network members' abortion experiences respondents will report. This study compares the effect of using the "best friend" (closest female friend) versus "confidante" (specifying mutual sharing of personal information) definition on abortion incidence estimation. We use data from a nationally representative survey of women aged 15-49 in Burkina Faso (conducted in 2020-2021) where respondents were randomized into two versions of an abortion module, using different friend definitions. We computed abortion rate estimates by friend definition and adjusted for assumption violations (transmission bias, surrogate sample selection bias). Unadjusted incidence rates varied from 11.7 [4.1-19.2] abortions per 1,000 women to 15.6 [9.7-21.4], depending on friend definition. The confidante definition yielded higher adjusted estimates (36.2 [25.1-47.2]) than the best friend definition (17.0 [8.7-25.3]) due to greater transmission bias adjustment. Both estimates exceeded the respondent self-reported abortion incidence (4.0 [2.2-5.9]). Our results indicate that either friend definition produces higher incidence estimates than self-report but suggest a potential advantage for the "best friend" over the "confidante" definition given lower transmission bias. Further research should assess generalizability of these findings in other contexts.
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.