Literature DB >> 29460216

Methodological Considerations in Couples' Fertility Intentions: Missing Men and the Viability of Women's Proxy Reports.

J Bart Stykes1.   

Abstract

Introduction Recent efforts show potential to advance research on unintended childbearing by taking a couple-level approach. However, this work has neither adequately addressed methodological concerns stemming from the challenges associated with male fertility data nor considered the viability of women's proxy reports of fathers intentions. Methods Data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B) were used to assess the implications of low response rates among men on couples' unintended childbearing. Then, the accuracy of women's proxy reports of fathers intentions was assessed. Weighted logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine how women's characteristics were associated with men's survey participation whereas weighted multinomial logistic regression analyses were applied to determine how women's characteristics were linked with the accuracy of her proxy report. Results Almost half (46%) of women cannot be matched with data from the child's father, and this discrepancy is most problematic for women who are black, foreign-born, less educated, and unmarried at birth. Women's proxy reports appear viable as 75% of women's reports are consistent with men's responses. Yet, proxy reports underestimate disagreement in couples' intentions as mothers who intended the birth are at an increased risk of "inaccurately" reporting that fathers share their intentions. Discussion Direct approaches to couples' intentions yield privileged samples and systematically omit women at the greatest risk of an unintended birth. However, proxies underestimate disagreement in couples' intentions-a key contribution to the couple approach. Accordingly each approach has its own merits which must be considered in light of specified research questions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Couples; Data quality; Measurement; Unintended childbearing

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29460216     DOI: 10.1007/s10995-018-2501-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Matern Child Health J        ISSN: 1092-7875


  19 in total

1.  Disparities in rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, 1994 and 2001.

Authors:  Lawrence B Finer; Stanley K Henshaw
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2006-06

2.  The couple context of pregnancy and its effects on prenatal care and birth outcomes.

Authors:  Bryndl Hohmann-Marriott
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2009-04-21

3.  Couple childbearing desires, intentions, and births.

Authors:  E Thomson
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1997-08

4.  Education Differences in Intended and Unintended Fertility.

Authors:  Kelly Musick; Paula England; Sarah Edgington; Nicole Kangas
Journal:  Soc Forces       Date:  2009-12

5.  Individual and couple intentions for more children: a research note.

Authors:  S P Morgan
Journal:  Demography       Date:  1985-02

6.  Parental pregnancy wantedness and child social-emotional development.

Authors:  Haneefa T Saleem; Pamela J Surkan
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2014-05

7.  Home and parenting resources available to siblings depending on their birth intention status.

Authors:  Jennifer S Barber; Patricia L East
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2009 May-Jun

8.  Strength of attachment: survey coverage of people with tenuous ties to residences.

Authors:  Elizabeth Martin
Journal:  Demography       Date:  2007-05

9.  Intended and unintended births in the United States: 1982-2010.

Authors:  William D Mosher; Jo Jones; Joyce C Abma
Journal:  Natl Health Stat Report       Date:  2012-07-24

10.  Consequences for infants of parental disagreement in pregnancy intention.

Authors:  Sanders Korenman; Robert Kaestner; Ted Joyce
Journal:  Perspect Sex Reprod Health       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug
View more
  6 in total

1.  Unintended Childbearing and Marital Instability: An Emphasis on Couples' Intentions.

Authors:  J Bart Stykes; Karen Benjamin Guzzo
Journal:  J Divorce Remarriage       Date:  2020-05-25

2.  Pathways to Parenthood in Social and Family Context: Decade in Review, 2020.

Authors:  Karen Benjamin Guzzo; Sarah R Hayford
Journal:  J Marriage Fam       Date:  2020-01-05

3.  A qualitative study of factors influencing male participation in fertility research.

Authors:  Alyssa F Harlow; Amy Zheng; John Nordberg; Elizabeth E Hatch; Sam Ransbotham; Lauren A Wise
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 3.223

4.  The prevalence of unintended pregnancy and its association with HIV status among pregnant women in South Africa, a national antenatal survey, 2019.

Authors:  Selamawit Woldesenbet; Tendesayi Kufa; Carl Lombard; Samuel Manda; Diane Morof; Mireille Cheyip; Kassahun Ayalew; Adrian Puren
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-12-09       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Third birth intention of the childbearing-age population in mainland China and sociodemographic differences: a cross-sectional survey.

Authors:  Zhang Yan; Lin Hui; Jiang Wenbin; Lu Liuxue; Li Yuemei; Lv Bohan; Wei Lili
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Both parents matter: a national-scale analysis of parental race/ethnicity, disparities in prenatal PM2.5 exposures and related impacts on birth outcomes.

Authors:  Devon C Payne-Sturges; Robin Puett; Deborah A Cory-Slechta
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 7.123

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.