Characteristics Associated with Reliability in Reporting of Contraceptive Use: Assessing the Reliability of the Contraceptive Calendar in Seven Countries.

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY Studies in Family Planning Pub Date : 2023-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-30 DOI:10.1111/sifp.12226
Philip Anglewicz, Dana Sarnak, Alison Gemmill, Stan Becker
{"title":"Characteristics Associated with Reliability in Reporting of Contraceptive Use: Assessing the Reliability of the Contraceptive Calendar in Seven Countries.","authors":"Philip Anglewicz,&nbsp;Dana Sarnak,&nbsp;Alison Gemmill,&nbsp;Stan Becker","doi":"10.1111/sifp.12226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although the reproductive calendar is the primary tool for measuring contraceptive dynamics in low-income settings, the reliability of calendar data has seldom been evaluated, primarily due to the lack of longitudinal panel data. In this research, we evaluated the reproductive calendar using data from the Performance Monitoring for Action Project. We used population-based longitudinal data from nine settings in seven countries: Burkina Faso, Nigeria (Kano and Lagos States), Democratic Republic of Congo (Kinshasa and Kongo Central Provinces), Kenya, Uganda, Cote d'Ivoire, and India. To evaluate reliability, we compared the baseline cross-sectional report of contraceptive use (overall and by contraceptive method), nonuse, or pregnancy with the retrospective reproductive calendar entry for the corresponding month, measured at follow-up. We use multivariable regressions to identify characteristics associated with reliability or reporting. Overall, we find that the reliability of the calendar is in the \"moderate/substantial\" range for nearly all geographies and tests (Kappa statistics between 0.58 and 0.81). Measures of the complexity of the calendar (number of contraceptive use episodes, using the long-acting method at baseline) are associated with reliability. We also find that women who were using contraception without their partners/husband's knowledge (i.e., covertly) were less likely to report reliably in several countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"54 1","pages":"17-38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12226","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Although the reproductive calendar is the primary tool for measuring contraceptive dynamics in low-income settings, the reliability of calendar data has seldom been evaluated, primarily due to the lack of longitudinal panel data. In this research, we evaluated the reproductive calendar using data from the Performance Monitoring for Action Project. We used population-based longitudinal data from nine settings in seven countries: Burkina Faso, Nigeria (Kano and Lagos States), Democratic Republic of Congo (Kinshasa and Kongo Central Provinces), Kenya, Uganda, Cote d'Ivoire, and India. To evaluate reliability, we compared the baseline cross-sectional report of contraceptive use (overall and by contraceptive method), nonuse, or pregnancy with the retrospective reproductive calendar entry for the corresponding month, measured at follow-up. We use multivariable regressions to identify characteristics associated with reliability or reporting. Overall, we find that the reliability of the calendar is in the "moderate/substantial" range for nearly all geographies and tests (Kappa statistics between 0.58 and 0.81). Measures of the complexity of the calendar (number of contraceptive use episodes, using the long-acting method at baseline) are associated with reliability. We also find that women who were using contraception without their partners/husband's knowledge (i.e., covertly) were less likely to report reliably in several countries.

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
与避孕药具使用报告可靠性相关的特征:评估七个国家避孕药具日历的可靠性。
尽管生殖日历是衡量低收入环境中避孕动态的主要工具,但日历数据的可靠性很少得到评估,主要是由于缺乏纵向面板数据。在这项研究中,我们使用行动绩效监测项目的数据评估了生育日历。我们使用了来自七个国家九个地区的基于人口的纵向数据:布基纳法索、尼日利亚(卡诺州和拉各斯州)、刚果民主共和国(金沙萨和孔戈中部省)、肯尼亚、乌干达、科特迪瓦和印度。为了评估可靠性,我们将避孕使用(总体和按避孕方法)、未使用或怀孕的基线横断面报告与随访时测量的相应月份的回顾性生殖日历条目进行了比较。我们使用多变量回归来识别与可靠性或报告相关的特征。总体而言,我们发现,几乎所有地区和测试的日历可靠性都在“中等/实质性”范围内(Kappa统计数据在0.58和0.81之间)。日历复杂性的衡量标准(基线时使用长效方法的避孕使用次数)与可靠性相关。我们还发现,在几个国家,在伴侣/丈夫不知情的情况下(即秘密)避孕的女性不太可能可靠地报告。
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
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.
期刊最新文献
Unwanted Family Planning Including Unwanted Sterilization: Preliminary Prevalence Estimates for India. The Reliability of Contraceptive Discontinuation Reporting in Burkina Faso, Kenya, and Uganda. Contraceptive Care Visit Objectives and Outcomes: Evidence From Burkina Faso, Pakistan, and Tanzania. Estimating the Social Visibility of Abortions in Uganda and Ethiopia Using the Game of Contacts Women's Perspectives on the Unique Benefits and Challenges of Self‐Injectable Contraception: A Four‐Country In‐Depth Interview Study in Sub‐Saharan Africa
×
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