Unmet need for effective family planning in HIV-infected individuals: results from a survey in rural Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY: This study determined the unmet need for family planning among HIV-positive and HIV-negative individuals living in western Uganda. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals who were randomly selected from HIV testing lists. Of those individuals, further analysis was conducted on a subset of 206 participants who did not desire more children and were not using a highly effective method of contraception. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate methods were performed to assess the relationship between HIV status and unmet need for effective family planning. RESULTS: The unmet need for effective family planning was much greater in HIV-infected individuals compared to HIV-negative individuals [75.0% vs 33.8%, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.97-8.03, p<0.001]. Females were more likely to report an unmet need compared to males (69.0% vs 49.5%; adjusted OR 1.94, 95% CI 0.94-4.00, p=0.071). Other predictors of unmet need for effective family planning were older age (adjusted OR 1.08 for each year of age, 95% CI 1.00-1.16, p=0.018) and single/cohabiting vs being married (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.16-4.80, p=0.036). Being on antiretroviral therapy was not a predictor of having a lower unmet need for effective family planning methods. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: There is high unmet need for effective family planning in HIV-positive study participants in a region of western Uganda, which should be of concern. This suggests that HIV-infected individuals do not want to use family planning or encounter barriers to accessing and utilising family planning services. Family planning programmes and HIV care and prevention services have to work together more effectively to create services conducive to clients from both programmes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".