↓ Skip to main content

Family planning counseling and its associations with modern contraceptive use, initiation, and continuation in rural Uttar Pradesh, India

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, December 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
154 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Family planning counseling and its associations with modern contraceptive use, initiation, and continuation in rural Uttar Pradesh, India
Published in
Reproductive Health, December 2019
DOI 10.1186/s12978-019-0844-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nabamallika Dehingia, Anvita Dixit, Sarah Averbach, Vikas Choudhry, Arnab Dey, Dharmendra Chandurkar, Priya Nanda, Jay G. Silverman, Anita Raj

Abstract

We examine the association between the quality of family planning (FP) counseling received in past 24 months, and current modern contraceptive use, initiation, and continuation, among a sample of women in rural Uttar Pradesh, India. This study included data from a longitudinal study with two rounds of representative household survey (2014 and 2016), with currently married women of age 15-49 years; the analysis excluded women who were already using a permanent method of contraceptive during the first round of survey and who reported discontinuation because they wanted to be pregnant (N = 1398). We measured quality of FP counseling using four items on whether women were informed of advantages and disadvantages of different methods, were told of method(s) that are appropriate for them, whether their questions were answered, and whether they perceived the counseling to be helpful. Positive responses to every item was categorized as higher quality counseling, vs lower quality counseling for positive response to less than four items. Outcome variables included modern contraceptive use during the second round of survey, and a variable categorizing women based on their contraceptive use behavior during the two rounds: continued-users, new-users, discontinued-users, and non-users. Around 22% had received any FP counseling; only 4% received higher-quality counseling. Those who received lower-quality FP counseling had 2.42x the odds of reporting current use of any modern contraceptive method (95% CI: 1.56-3.76), and those who received higher quality FP counseling at 4.14x the odds of reporting modern contraceptive use (95% CI: 1.72-9.99), as compared to women reporting no FP counseling. Women receiving higher-quality counseling also had higher likelihood of continued use (ARRR 5.93; 95% CI: 1.97-17.83), as well as new use or initiation (ARRR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.44-12.35) of modern contraceptives. Receipt of lower-quality counseling also showed statistically significant associations with continued and new use of modern contraceptives, but the effect sizes were smaller than those for higher-quality counseling. Findings suggest the value of FP counseling. With a patient-centered approach to counseling, continued use of modern contraceptives can be supported among married women of reproductive age. Unfortunately, FP counseling, particularly higher-quality FP counseling remains rare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 154 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 21 14%
Researcher 11 7%
Student > Master 11 7%
Lecturer 11 7%
Unspecified 8 5%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 66 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 19%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Unspecified 8 5%
Arts and Humanities 2 1%
Other 8 5%
Unknown 66 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 January 2020.
All research outputs
#13,665,876
of 23,182,015 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#974
of 1,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,863
of 459,477 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#19
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,182,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 459,477 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.