将方法不满意纳入未满足的避孕需求:测量和影响的含义。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY Studies in Family Planning Pub Date : 2021-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-02-17 DOI:10.1111/sifp.12146
Claire W Rothschild, Win Brown, Alison L Drake
{"title":"将方法不满意纳入未满足的避孕需求:测量和影响的含义。","authors":"Claire W Rothschild,&nbsp;Win Brown,&nbsp;Alison L Drake","doi":"10.1111/sifp.12146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While unmet need for contraception is commonly used to assess programmatic needs, it inadequately captures the complexity of fertility and contraceptive preferences, including women's satisfaction with their contraceptive method. In their 2019 commentary, Sarah Rominski and Rob Stephenson propose reclassifying dissatisfied current users as having an unmet need for contraception. As revising the current definition based on their proposal would require significant investment to update survey and monitoring systems, understanding the potential impact on current estimates of unmet need is critical. We estimated the impact of this approach in a Kenyan cohort of modern contraceptive users. We found the prevalence of method dissatisfaction ranges from 6.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6-7.8%) to 18.9% (95% CI 17.1-20.9%); if applied nationally, this results in a large (approximately 25-70%) increase in Kenya's current estimate of unmet need for any contraception. Our findings suggest a large impact on unmet need estimates for equivalent populations. Overall, we advocate for better measurements of method satisfaction and acceptability, with metrics developed that are robust to socioeconomic gradients and validated in low- and middle-income settings to ensure women's contraceptive needs are captured equitably.</p>","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"52 1","pages":"95-102"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/sifp.12146","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorporating Method Dissatisfaction into Unmet Need for Contraception: Implications for Measurement and Impact.\",\"authors\":\"Claire W Rothschild,&nbsp;Win Brown,&nbsp;Alison L Drake\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sifp.12146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While unmet need for contraception is commonly used to assess programmatic needs, it inadequately captures the complexity of fertility and contraceptive preferences, including women's satisfaction with their contraceptive method. In their 2019 commentary, Sarah Rominski and Rob Stephenson propose reclassifying dissatisfied current users as having an unmet need for contraception. As revising the current definition based on their proposal would require significant investment to update survey and monitoring systems, understanding the potential impact on current estimates of unmet need is critical. We estimated the impact of this approach in a Kenyan cohort of modern contraceptive users. We found the prevalence of method dissatisfaction ranges from 6.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6-7.8%) to 18.9% (95% CI 17.1-20.9%); if applied nationally, this results in a large (approximately 25-70%) increase in Kenya's current estimate of unmet need for any contraception. Our findings suggest a large impact on unmet need estimates for equivalent populations. Overall, we advocate for better measurements of method satisfaction and acceptability, with metrics developed that are robust to socioeconomic gradients and validated in low- and middle-income settings to ensure women's contraceptive needs are captured equitably.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"95-102\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/sifp.12146\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12146\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/2/17 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.12146","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

虽然未满足的避孕需要通常用于评估方案需求,但它不能充分反映生育和避孕偏好的复杂性,包括妇女对其避孕方法的满意程度。在2019年的评论中,萨拉·罗明斯基和罗布·斯蒂芬森建议将不满意的现有使用者重新分类为避孕需求未得到满足的人。由于根据他们的建议修订目前的定义将需要大量投资以更新调查和监测系统,因此了解对目前未满足需求估计数的潜在影响至关重要。我们估计了这种方法在肯尼亚现代避孕药具使用者队列中的影响。我们发现,对方法不满意的患病率从6.6%(95%置信区间[CI] 5.6-7.8%)到18.9% (95% CI 17.1-20.9%);如果在全国范围内实施,这将导致肯尼亚目前估计未满足的任何避孕需求大幅增加(约25-70%)。我们的研究结果表明,对同等人口的未满足需求估计有很大影响。总的来说,我们提倡更好地测量方法的满意度和可接受性,并制定对社会经济梯度稳健的指标,并在低收入和中等收入环境中得到验证,以确保公平地捕捉妇女的避孕需求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Incorporating Method Dissatisfaction into Unmet Need for Contraception: Implications for Measurement and Impact.

While unmet need for contraception is commonly used to assess programmatic needs, it inadequately captures the complexity of fertility and contraceptive preferences, including women's satisfaction with their contraceptive method. In their 2019 commentary, Sarah Rominski and Rob Stephenson propose reclassifying dissatisfied current users as having an unmet need for contraception. As revising the current definition based on their proposal would require significant investment to update survey and monitoring systems, understanding the potential impact on current estimates of unmet need is critical. We estimated the impact of this approach in a Kenyan cohort of modern contraceptive users. We found the prevalence of method dissatisfaction ranges from 6.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6-7.8%) to 18.9% (95% CI 17.1-20.9%); if applied nationally, this results in a large (approximately 25-70%) increase in Kenya's current estimate of unmet need for any contraception. Our findings suggest a large impact on unmet need estimates for equivalent populations. Overall, we advocate for better measurements of method satisfaction and acceptability, with metrics developed that are robust to socioeconomic gradients and validated in low- and middle-income settings to ensure women's contraceptive needs are captured equitably.

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.
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