| Title |
Non-Heterosexuality, Relationships, and Young Women’s Contraceptive Behavior
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Demography, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13524-017-0578-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elizabeth J. Ela, Jamie Budnick |
| Abstract |
Non-heterosexual young women have a higher rate of unintended pregnancy than their heterosexual peers, but their fertility behaviors are understudied. We use longitudinal data from the Relationship Dynamics and Social Life study to investigate mechanisms contributing to non-heterosexual women's higher pregnancy risk. These data include weekly reports of relationships, sex, and contraceptive use over 30 months. We compare the relationships and fertility behaviors of three groups: exclusively heterosexual (consistent heterosexual behavior, identity, and attraction); mostly heterosexual (heterosexual identity with same-sex behavior and/or same-sex attraction); and LGBTQ (any non-heterosexual identity). We find that mostly heterosexual and LGBTQ women behave differently from exclusively heterosexual women in ways likely to elevate their risk of unintended pregnancy: more distinct partners during the study period, more sexual intercourse with men, less frequent contraceptive use, less use of a dual method (condom plus hormonal method), and more gaps in contraceptive coverage. Mostly heterosexual women resemble LGBTQ women in their contraceptive behavior but have significantly more intercourse with men, which may increase their pregnancy risk relative to both LGBTQ and exclusively heterosexual women. We conclude by considering implications for LGBTQ health and the measurement of sexual minority populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 15 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 13% |
| Psychology | 8 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 21 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,365,671
of 23,642,687 outputs
Outputs from Demography
#372
of 1,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,966
of 311,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Demography
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,642,687 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,913 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,790 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.