Role of community-level emergency contraceptive pills awareness and possibilities of long-acting reversible or permanent methods in reducing unwanted births in Bangladesh: evidence from a nationwide cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the role of community-level emergency contraceptive pill (ECP) awareness in reducing unwanted births (UWBs) in Bangladesh and explore the regional variation in women's appropriateness to adopt long-acting reversible contraceptives or permanent methods (LARCPMs) based on their child desire. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: We used data from the cross-sectional Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2017-2018. We analysed the planning status of the last live birth 3 years preceding the survey of 20,127 ever-married women of reproductive age. METHODS: Considering women were nested within clusters, a mixed-effect multiple logistic regression was implemented to investigate the association between community-level ECP awareness and UWB by controlling for the effects of contextual, individual, and household characteristics. RESULTS: Only 3.7% of women belonged to communities with high ECP awareness. At the national level, 2% of women had UWB. About 2.1% of women who resided in communities of low ECP awareness had UWB, while UWB was only 0.5% among women residing in high ECP awareness communities. The odds of UWB was 71% lower among women who resided in high ECP awareness communities than among those who resided in communities with low ECP awareness. However, community-level ECP awareness could not avert mistimed birth. Dhaka, Chattogram and Rangpur held the highest share of UWB. Fertility persisted for 89% of the women who wanted no more children. Among women who wanted no more children, 15% were not using any method, 13% used traditional family planning methods and only 13% adopted LARCPM. These women mostly resided in Dhaka, followed by Chattogram and Rajshahi. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the significant positive role of ECP awareness in reducing UWB in Bangladesh. Findings may inform policies aimed at increasing LARCPM adoption, particularly among women residing in Dhaka and Chattogram who want no more children.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".