Literature DB >> 21723743

Do ambivalent women have an unmet need for family planning? A longitudinal study from Bali, Indonesia.

Mellissa H Withers1, Paula Tavrow, N Ardika Adinata.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Fertility intentions often can predict contraceptive demand and fertility outcomes. Little is known about women reporting ambivalent fertility intentions, who are usually classified as having an unmet need for contraception. This study's objectives were to determine 1) which fertility intention group ambivalent women more closely resemble and 2) whether ambivalent women seem to have an unmet contraceptive need.
METHODS: We analyzed longitudinal data from 1,018 married Balinese women aged 15 to 45, of whom 33% desired more children, 52% wanted no more, and 14% were ambivalent. Ambivalent women were compared with those with definitive intentions using bivariate analyses. Regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of birth avoidance.
RESULTS: Although ambivalent women were significantly older, and had less education and more children than women who wanted more children, ambivalent women were more similar in their contraceptive use to those who wanted more children than those who wanted no more. However, in terms of birth outcomes, ambivalent women resembled more the women who intended to avoid childbearing: After 4 years, 33% of ambivalent women had another birth compared with 29% of women who wanted no more and 57% of women who desired more children. Contraceptive use at baseline did not predict ambivalent women's fertility outcomes, unlike the other groups.
CONCLUSION: Despite their relatively low rates of contraceptive use at baseline, ambivalent women generally avoided giving birth during the study period. This suggests that ambivalent women may not have a high unmet need for family planning. Copyright Â
© 2011 Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21723743     DOI: 10.1016/j.whi.2011.04.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Womens Health Issues        ISSN: 1049-3867


  7 in total

1.  Conceptualizing Childbearing Ambivalence: A Social and Dynamic Perspective.

Authors:  Christie Sennott; Sara Yeatman
Journal:  J Marriage Fam       Date:  2018-05-09

2.  Measurement of unmet need for family planning: longitudinal analysis of the impact of fertility desires on subsequent childbearing behaviors among urban women from Uttar Pradesh, India.

Authors:  Ilene S Speizer; Lisa M Calhoun; Theresa Hoke; Ranajit Sengupta
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2013-04-26       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Postpartum contraceptive use and unmet need for family planning in five low-income countries.

Authors:  Omrana Pasha; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Archana Patel; Ana Garces; Fabian Esamai; Elwyn Chomba; Janet L Moore; Bhalchandra S Kodkany; Sarah Saleem; Richard J Derman; Edward A Liechty; Patricia L Hibberd; K Hambidge; Nancy F Krebs; Waldemar A Carlo; Elizabeth M McClure; Marion Koso-Thomas; Robert L Goldenberg
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2015-06-08       Impact factor: 3.223

4.  The role of change in fertility desire on change in family planning use: A longitudinal investigation in urban Uttar Pradesh, India.

Authors:  Ujjaval Srivastava; Anjali Singh; Prashant Verma; Kaushalendra Kumar Singh
Journal:  Gates Open Res       Date:  2019-04-29

5.  Language and Measurement of Contraceptive Need and Making These Indicators More Meaningful for Measuring Fertility Intentions of Women and Girls.

Authors:  Ilene S Speizer; Jason Bremner; Shiza Farid
Journal:  Glob Health Sci Pract       Date:  2022-02-28

6.  Fertility desires, family planning use and pregnancy experience: longitudinal examination of urban areas in three African countries.

Authors:  Ilene S Speizer; Peter Lance
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Longitudinal examination of changing fertility intentions and behaviors over a four-year period in urban Senegal.

Authors:  Ilene S Speizer; Veronica Escamilla; Peter M Lance; David K Guilkey
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 3.223

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.