The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

What is the impact of contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unmet need for family planning, and unwanted and unintended pregnancies?

What is the impact of contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unmet need for family planning, and unwanted and unintended pregnancies?
What is the impact of contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unmet need for family planning, and unwanted and unintended pregnancies?
Background - In many low-and middle-income countries, there is high maternal, infant and child mortality due in part to low contraceptive use and high unmet need for family planning. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews is to synthesise the findings of systematic reviews conducted in this area to assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unwanted and unintended pregnancies, and unmet need (a desire to limit the number of children but not currently using any contraception) for family planning in developing countries/regions.Methods - Eight databases (Bioline international, The Cochrane Library, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature - LILACS, Popline, PubMed, Turning Research Into Practice, World Health Organisation Reproductive Health Library and Zetoc) were searched from 28 October 2010 to 08 December 2010. Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews were included. Eligible reviews included studies whose participants were sexually active women or men from countries classified as ‘developing’, ‘low-income’ or ‘middle-income’. Systematic reviews of any intervention (or combination of interventions) designed to increase contraceptive prevalence, reduce fertility or both were eligible. Data were extracted and synthesised narratively. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, AMSTAR, was used to evaluate the quality of the included systematic reviews, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the quality of the body of evidence for each comparison. To aid the interpretation of the findings for a variety of settings, relevant contextual information was presented where possible.Results - There were 22 systematic reviews included in this overview of reviews. The overview examined a range of contraceptive methods, including modern (terminal and spacing) and traditional methods (such as withdrawal and periodic abstinence which do not require contraceptive substances or devices and also do not require clinical procedures). However, the systematic reviews included did not address all the objectives of the overview.The results of the review are summarised below according to the objectives.Objective 1: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence in developing countries/regions. There was no systematic review that met this objective.Objective 2: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on unwanted and unintended pregnancies in developingcountries/regions.The body of evidence for the relative efficacy or effectiveness of a variety ofcontraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy in developing countries was generally rated as of low or moderate quality. There was, however, a number of comparisons (between different derivatives of the same contraceptive methods) for which the evidence was rated as of high or moderate quality. Evidence from systematic reviews is lacking on the acceptability of contraceptive methods and their impact on prevalence and on unmet needs for family planning. The evidence for the relative effectiveness of a variety of contraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy in developing countries is generally of low quality. There is some high-quality evidence comparing different derivatives of the same contraceptive methods, although this is more often evidence of efficacy than evidence of effectiveness.Objective 3: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on unmet need for family planning in developing countries/regions.There was no systematic review that met this objective.
2108
London: EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London
MacKenzie, Heather
e1e524b1-b525-4da4-a7d3-d0bb359f4680
Drahota, Amy
cab2a5ec-7f58-47f6-8f8a-54ef7fefa3ec
Pallikadavath, Sasee
ae77cead-f187-492a-b224-a65b604a8d6e
Stones, William
e1cb5658-a244-49fc-b1f5-e805fbc1f309
Dean, Tara
ff84e86b-7bba-4408-881f-425cf1b31da5
Fogg, Carole
42057537-d443-462a-8944-c804252c973b
Stores, Rebecca
f0d414ac-9af1-4ec0-b849-fe3fd4032521
Kilburn, Sally
93dce32b-efb6-4dc3-b249-a0bf47d8b34a
Dewey, Ann
e0734bf3-5ad8-4c6b-8658-089a3b7d36d2
Ogollah, Reuben
c657dc51-c77d-4638-97d1-a213a3fd4c06
MacKenzie, Heather
e1e524b1-b525-4da4-a7d3-d0bb359f4680
Drahota, Amy
cab2a5ec-7f58-47f6-8f8a-54ef7fefa3ec
Pallikadavath, Sasee
ae77cead-f187-492a-b224-a65b604a8d6e
Stones, William
e1cb5658-a244-49fc-b1f5-e805fbc1f309
Dean, Tara
ff84e86b-7bba-4408-881f-425cf1b31da5
Fogg, Carole
42057537-d443-462a-8944-c804252c973b
Stores, Rebecca
f0d414ac-9af1-4ec0-b849-fe3fd4032521
Kilburn, Sally
93dce32b-efb6-4dc3-b249-a0bf47d8b34a
Dewey, Ann
e0734bf3-5ad8-4c6b-8658-089a3b7d36d2
Ogollah, Reuben
c657dc51-c77d-4638-97d1-a213a3fd4c06

MacKenzie, Heather, Drahota, Amy, Pallikadavath, Sasee, Stones, William, Dean, Tara, Fogg, Carole, Stores, Rebecca, Kilburn, Sally, Dewey, Ann and Ogollah, Reuben (2013) What is the impact of contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unmet need for family planning, and unwanted and unintended pregnancies? (EPPI report, 2108) London. London: EPPI Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

Record type: Monograph (Project Report)

Abstract

Background - In many low-and middle-income countries, there is high maternal, infant and child mortality due in part to low contraceptive use and high unmet need for family planning. The aim of this overview of systematic reviews is to synthesise the findings of systematic reviews conducted in this area to assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes of contraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence, unwanted and unintended pregnancies, and unmet need (a desire to limit the number of children but not currently using any contraception) for family planning in developing countries/regions.Methods - Eight databases (Bioline international, The Cochrane Library, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature - LILACS, Popline, PubMed, Turning Research Into Practice, World Health Organisation Reproductive Health Library and Zetoc) were searched from 28 October 2010 to 08 December 2010. Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews were included. Eligible reviews included studies whose participants were sexually active women or men from countries classified as ‘developing’, ‘low-income’ or ‘middle-income’. Systematic reviews of any intervention (or combination of interventions) designed to increase contraceptive prevalence, reduce fertility or both were eligible. Data were extracted and synthesised narratively. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, AMSTAR, was used to evaluate the quality of the included systematic reviews, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the quality of the body of evidence for each comparison. To aid the interpretation of the findings for a variety of settings, relevant contextual information was presented where possible.Results - There were 22 systematic reviews included in this overview of reviews. The overview examined a range of contraceptive methods, including modern (terminal and spacing) and traditional methods (such as withdrawal and periodic abstinence which do not require contraceptive substances or devices and also do not require clinical procedures). However, the systematic reviews included did not address all the objectives of the overview.The results of the review are summarised below according to the objectives.Objective 1: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on contraceptive prevalence in developing countries/regions. There was no systematic review that met this objective.Objective 2: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on unwanted and unintended pregnancies in developingcountries/regions.The body of evidence for the relative efficacy or effectiveness of a variety ofcontraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy in developing countries was generally rated as of low or moderate quality. There was, however, a number of comparisons (between different derivatives of the same contraceptive methods) for which the evidence was rated as of high or moderate quality. Evidence from systematic reviews is lacking on the acceptability of contraceptive methods and their impact on prevalence and on unmet needs for family planning. The evidence for the relative effectiveness of a variety of contraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy in developing countries is generally of low quality. There is some high-quality evidence comparing different derivatives of the same contraceptive methods, although this is more often evidence of efficacy than evidence of effectiveness.Objective 3: To assess the impact of various contraceptive methods and mixes ofcontraceptive methods on unmet need for family planning in developing countries/regions.There was no systematic review that met this objective.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 1 November 2013

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 436980
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/436980
PURE UUID: 225794f5-3082-4d7b-9d27-2e52f2ebbc6f
ORCID for Heather MacKenzie: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5241-0007
ORCID for Carole Fogg: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-3000-6185

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 14 Jan 2020 18:34
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:59

Export record

Contributors

Author: Heather MacKenzie ORCID iD
Author: Amy Drahota
Author: Sasee Pallikadavath
Author: William Stones
Author: Tara Dean
Author: Carole Fogg ORCID iD
Author: Rebecca Stores
Author: Sally Kilburn
Author: Ann Dewey
Author: Reuben Ogollah

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×