Measuring non-events: infertility estimation using cross-sectional, population-based data from four countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Human reproduction Pub Date : 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1093/humrep/deae218
Suzanne O Bell, Caroline Moreau, Dana Sarnak, Simon P S Kibira, Philip Anglewicz, Peter Gichangi, Alexander C McLain, Marie Thoma
{"title":"Measuring non-events: infertility estimation using cross-sectional, population-based data from four countries in sub-Saharan Africa.","authors":"Suzanne O Bell, Caroline Moreau, Dana Sarnak, Simon P S Kibira, Philip Anglewicz, Peter Gichangi, Alexander C McLain, Marie Thoma","doi":"10.1093/humrep/deae218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study question: </strong>Does the prevalence of 12-month infertility in Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, and Uganda differ between women trying to conceive and the broader population of women exposed to unprotected sex, and how are prevalence estimates affected by model assumptions and adjustments?</p><p><strong>Summary answer: </strong>Estimates of 12-month infertility among tryers ranged from 8% in Burkina Faso to 30% in Côte d'Ivoire, increasing substantially among a larger population of women exposed to unprotected intercourse.</p><p><strong>What is known already: </strong>While having a child is a fundamental human experience, the extent to which women and couples experience infertility is a neglected area of research, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Existing estimates of infertility in this region vary widely from 2% to 32%, however, potential impacts of variability in study populations and model assumptions have not been well-examined.</p><p><strong>Study design, size, duration: </strong>We used cross-sectional nationally representative survey data from Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, and Uganda. We employed a multi-stage cluster random sampling design with probability proportional to the size selection of clusters within each country to produce representative samples of women aged 15-49. Samples ranged from 3864 in Côte d'Ivoire to 9489 in Kenya.</p><p><strong>Participants/materials, setting, methods: </strong>We created two analytic samples in each country-tryers and a broader sample of women exposed to unprotected sex-exploring differences in population characteristics and estimating the period prevalence of 12-month infertility using the current duration (CD) approach. We also examined the impact of several model assumptions within each of the two analytic samples, including adjustments for recent injectable contraceptive use, unrecognized pregnancy, infertility treatment, underreported contraceptive use, and sexual activity.</p><p><strong>Main results and the role of chance: </strong>Employing the CD approach among tryers produced an overall 12-month infertility prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI 6.6-12.7) in Burkina Faso, 29.6% (95% CI 15.3-100.0) in Côte d'Ivoire, 24.5% (95% CI 16.5-34.6) in Kenya, and 14.7% (95% CI 8.1-22.4) in Uganda. Results among women exposed to unprotected intercourse indicated much higher levels of infertility, ranging from 22.4% (95% CI 18.6-30.8) in Uganda to 63.7% (95% CI 48.8-87.9) in Côte d'Ivoire. Sensitivity analyses suggest infertility estimates are particularly sensitive to adjustments around pregnancy recognition timing and sexual activity, with little impact of adjustments for recent injectable contraceptive use, infertility treatment, and underreporting of traditional and coital dependent contraceptive use.</p><p><strong>Limitations, reasons for caution: </strong>There was substantial digit preference in responses at 12 months, particularly among the tryers, which could introduce bias. Data quality concerns in the reproductive calendar may impact the accuracy of the CD approach among the broader sample of women exposed to unprotected sex, particularly with regard to underreported contraceptive use, induced and spontaneous abortions, and unrecognized pregnancies. Lastly, we lacked information on postpartum amenorrhea or abstinence.</p><p><strong>Wider implications of the findings: </strong>Understanding the inconsistencies in definition and analytic approach and their implications for infertility estimation is important for reliably monitoring population-level infertility trends, identifying factors influencing infertility, improving prevention programs, and ensuring access to quality treatment and services.</p><p><strong>Study funding/competing interest(s): </strong>This study was supported by grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV009639) and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K01HD107172). The funders were not involved in the study design, analyses, manuscript writing, or the decision to publish. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>N/A.</p>","PeriodicalId":13003,"journal":{"name":"Human reproduction","volume":" ","pages":"2848-2860"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11629970/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae218","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study question: Does the prevalence of 12-month infertility in Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, and Uganda differ between women trying to conceive and the broader population of women exposed to unprotected sex, and how are prevalence estimates affected by model assumptions and adjustments?

Summary answer: Estimates of 12-month infertility among tryers ranged from 8% in Burkina Faso to 30% in Côte d'Ivoire, increasing substantially among a larger population of women exposed to unprotected intercourse.

What is known already: While having a child is a fundamental human experience, the extent to which women and couples experience infertility is a neglected area of research, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Existing estimates of infertility in this region vary widely from 2% to 32%, however, potential impacts of variability in study populations and model assumptions have not been well-examined.

Study design, size, duration: We used cross-sectional nationally representative survey data from Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya, and Uganda. We employed a multi-stage cluster random sampling design with probability proportional to the size selection of clusters within each country to produce representative samples of women aged 15-49. Samples ranged from 3864 in Côte d'Ivoire to 9489 in Kenya.

Participants/materials, setting, methods: We created two analytic samples in each country-tryers and a broader sample of women exposed to unprotected sex-exploring differences in population characteristics and estimating the period prevalence of 12-month infertility using the current duration (CD) approach. We also examined the impact of several model assumptions within each of the two analytic samples, including adjustments for recent injectable contraceptive use, unrecognized pregnancy, infertility treatment, underreported contraceptive use, and sexual activity.

Main results and the role of chance: Employing the CD approach among tryers produced an overall 12-month infertility prevalence of 7.9% (95% CI 6.6-12.7) in Burkina Faso, 29.6% (95% CI 15.3-100.0) in Côte d'Ivoire, 24.5% (95% CI 16.5-34.6) in Kenya, and 14.7% (95% CI 8.1-22.4) in Uganda. Results among women exposed to unprotected intercourse indicated much higher levels of infertility, ranging from 22.4% (95% CI 18.6-30.8) in Uganda to 63.7% (95% CI 48.8-87.9) in Côte d'Ivoire. Sensitivity analyses suggest infertility estimates are particularly sensitive to adjustments around pregnancy recognition timing and sexual activity, with little impact of adjustments for recent injectable contraceptive use, infertility treatment, and underreporting of traditional and coital dependent contraceptive use.

Limitations, reasons for caution: There was substantial digit preference in responses at 12 months, particularly among the tryers, which could introduce bias. Data quality concerns in the reproductive calendar may impact the accuracy of the CD approach among the broader sample of women exposed to unprotected sex, particularly with regard to underreported contraceptive use, induced and spontaneous abortions, and unrecognized pregnancies. Lastly, we lacked information on postpartum amenorrhea or abstinence.

Wider implications of the findings: Understanding the inconsistencies in definition and analytic approach and their implications for infertility estimation is important for reliably monitoring population-level infertility trends, identifying factors influencing infertility, improving prevention programs, and ensuring access to quality treatment and services.

Study funding/competing interest(s): This study was supported by grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV009639) and the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K01HD107172). The funders were not involved in the study design, analyses, manuscript writing, or the decision to publish. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Trial registration number: N/A.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
衡量非事件:利用撒哈拉以南非洲四个国家的横截面人口数据估算不孕症。
研究问题在布基纳法索、科特迪瓦、肯尼亚和乌干达,试图怀孕的女性和更广泛的无保护性行为女性人群中 12 个月不孕症的流行率是否存在差异,流行率估计值如何受到模型假设和调整的影响?对试孕者 12 个月不孕率的估计从布基纳法索的 8%到科特迪瓦的 30%不等,在更广泛的无保护性交女性人群中,不孕率大幅上升:虽然生儿育女是人类的基本经历,但妇女和夫妇不孕不育的程度是一个被忽视的研究领域,尤其是在撒哈拉以南非洲地区。该地区不孕症的现有估计值差异很大,从 2% 到 32%,但是,研究人群和模型假设的变化可能产生的影响尚未得到很好的研究:我们使用了来自布基纳法索、科特迪瓦、肯尼亚和乌干达的具有全国代表性的横断面调查数据。我们采用了多阶段群组随机抽样设计,在每个国家内根据群组的规模选择概率成正比的样本,以产生具有代表性的 15-49 岁女性样本。样本从科特迪瓦的 3864 个到肯尼亚的 9489 个不等:我们在每个国家建立了两个分析样本--尝试者样本和更广泛的无保护性行为女性样本--探索人口特征的差异,并使用当前持续时间(CD)方法估算 12 个月不孕症的时期流行率。我们还在两个分析样本中分别考察了几个模型假设的影响,包括对最近使用注射避孕药、未被发现的怀孕、不孕症治疗、未报告的避孕药使用情况以及性活动的调整:在尝试避孕者中采用 CD 方法得出的 12 个月不孕症总发生率为:布基纳法索 7.9% (95% CI 6.6-12.7)、科特迪瓦 29.6% (95% CI 15.3-100.0)、肯尼亚 24.5% (95% CI 16.5-34.6)、乌干达 14.7% (95% CI 8.1-22.4)。无保护措施性交妇女的不孕率要高得多,乌干达为 22.4%(95% CI 18.6-30.8),科特迪瓦为 63.7%(95% CI 48.8-87.9)。敏感性分析表明,不孕不育的估计值对怀孕确认时间和性活动的调整特别敏感,而对近期注射避孕药、不孕不育治疗以及传统和依赖同房的避孕药使用的漏报进行调整则影响不大:在 12 个月的回答中存在大量的数字偏好,尤其是在尝试者中,这可能会造成偏差。生殖日历中的数据质量问题可能会影响 CD 方法在更广泛的无保护性行为女性样本中的准确性,尤其是在少报避孕药具使用情况、人工流产和自然流产以及未被发现的怀孕方面。最后,我们缺乏有关产后闭经或禁欲的信息:研究结果的更广泛意义:了解定义和分析方法的不一致及其对不孕不育估计的影响,对于可靠地监测人群不孕不育趋势、确定影响不孕不育的因素、改进预防计划以及确保获得高质量的治疗和服务非常重要:本研究得到了比尔及梅琳达-盖茨基金会(INV009639)和美国国家儿童健康与人类发展研究所(K01HD107172)的资助。资助方未参与研究设计、分析、手稿撰写或发表决定。作者无利益冲突需要声明:不适用。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Human reproduction
Human reproduction 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
6.60%
发文量
1369
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Human Reproduction features full-length, peer-reviewed papers reporting original research, concise clinical case reports, as well as opinions and debates on topical issues. Papers published cover the clinical science and medical aspects of reproductive physiology, pathology and endocrinology; including andrology, gonad function, gametogenesis, fertilization, embryo development, implantation, early pregnancy, genetics, genetic diagnosis, oncology, infectious disease, surgery, contraception, infertility treatment, psychology, ethics and social issues.
期刊最新文献
Ethical considerations on surrogacy†. Recurrent implantation failure: science or fiction? A randomized controlled trial comparing embryo vitrification with slush nitrogen to liquid nitrogen in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer: embryology and clinical outcomes Beyond the disclosure debate in donor-conception: how do we help families to discuss origin stories with their children? Endometriosis and risk of depression among oral contraceptive users: a pooled analysis of cohort studies from 13 countries
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1