Acceptability and utilization of family planning benefits cards by youth in slums in Kampala, Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to test the acceptability and utilization of family planning benefits cards (FPBCs) as incentives to increase family planning uptake among youth living in urban slums in Uganda. We conducted a one-year pilot study with two sub-studies on acceptability and utilization of FPBCs. The acceptability study utilized a quantitative cross-sectional design and was part of a baseline household survey while the utilization study was a primary analysis of claims and clinic data. We performed descriptive analyses and analyses of the association between different variables using binary logistic regression. The acceptability study included 280 eligible females. The majority were married (52%), Christian (87%), and aged 20 and above (84%). Acceptability of the program was high (93%). Seventy-two percent of females used the card at least once to access reproductive health services. Twenty-seven percent of female users discontinued family planning and 14% changed family planning methods during the study. Female users of short-term contraceptive methods were 11 times more likely to discontinue use of FPBCs compared to those who used long-term methods (adjusted OR = 10.9, P = 0.011). Participants in professional/managerial employment were 30 times more likely to discontinue compared to the unemployed (adjusted OR = 30.3, P = 0.015). Participants of parity equal to two were 89% less likely to discontinue use of FPBCs compared to those of parity equal to zero (adjusted OR = 0.1, P = 0.019). Family planning benefits cards, deployed as incentives to increase uptake of family planning, exhibited high acceptability and utilization by youth in urban slums in Uganda. There was evidence that use of short-term contraception methods, professional employment, and lower parity were associated with discontinuation of modern family planning methods after initial enrolment. MUREC1/7 No. 10/05–17. Registered 19th, July 2017.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".