Cargando…
The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts
BACKGROUND: Obtaining representative abortion incidence estimates is challenging in restrictive contexts. While the confidante method has been increasingly used to collect this data in such settings, there are several biases commonly associated with this method. Further, there are significant variat...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10369773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37491276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-023-00310-0 |
_version_ | 1785077831509737472 |
---|---|
author | Owolabi, Onikepe O. Giorgio, Margaret Leong, Ellie Sully, Elizabeth |
author_facet | Owolabi, Onikepe O. Giorgio, Margaret Leong, Ellie Sully, Elizabeth |
author_sort | Owolabi, Onikepe O. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Obtaining representative abortion incidence estimates is challenging in restrictive contexts. While the confidante method has been increasingly used to collect this data in such settings, there are several biases commonly associated with this method. Further, there are significant variations in how researchers have implemented the method and assessed/adjusted for potential biases, limiting the comparability and interpretation of existing estimates. This study presents a standardized approach to analyzing confidante method data, generates comparable abortion incidence estimates from previously published studies and recommends standards for reporting bias assessments and adjustments for future confidante method studies. METHODS: We used data from previous applications of the confidante method in Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Java (Indonesia), Nigeria, Uganda, and Rajasthan (India). We estimated one-year induced abortion incidence rates for confidantes in each context, attempting to adjust for selection, reporting and transmission bias in a standardized manner. FINDINGS: In each setting, majority of the foundational confidante method assumptions were violated. Adjusting for transmission bias using self-reported abortions consistently yielded the highest incidence estimates compared with other published approaches. Differences in analytic decisions and bias assessments resulted in the incidence estimates from our standardized analysis varying widely from originally published rates. INTERPRETATION: We recommend that future studies clearly state which biases were assessed, if associated assumptions were violated, and how violations were adjusted for. This will improve the utility of confidante method estimates for national-level decision making and as inputs for global or regional model-based estimates of abortion. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12963-023-00310-0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10369773 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103697732023-07-27 The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts Owolabi, Onikepe O. Giorgio, Margaret Leong, Ellie Sully, Elizabeth Popul Health Metr Research BACKGROUND: Obtaining representative abortion incidence estimates is challenging in restrictive contexts. While the confidante method has been increasingly used to collect this data in such settings, there are several biases commonly associated with this method. Further, there are significant variations in how researchers have implemented the method and assessed/adjusted for potential biases, limiting the comparability and interpretation of existing estimates. This study presents a standardized approach to analyzing confidante method data, generates comparable abortion incidence estimates from previously published studies and recommends standards for reporting bias assessments and adjustments for future confidante method studies. METHODS: We used data from previous applications of the confidante method in Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Java (Indonesia), Nigeria, Uganda, and Rajasthan (India). We estimated one-year induced abortion incidence rates for confidantes in each context, attempting to adjust for selection, reporting and transmission bias in a standardized manner. FINDINGS: In each setting, majority of the foundational confidante method assumptions were violated. Adjusting for transmission bias using self-reported abortions consistently yielded the highest incidence estimates compared with other published approaches. Differences in analytic decisions and bias assessments resulted in the incidence estimates from our standardized analysis varying widely from originally published rates. INTERPRETATION: We recommend that future studies clearly state which biases were assessed, if associated assumptions were violated, and how violations were adjusted for. This will improve the utility of confidante method estimates for national-level decision making and as inputs for global or regional model-based estimates of abortion. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12963-023-00310-0. BioMed Central 2023-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC10369773/ /pubmed/37491276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-023-00310-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023, corrected publication 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Owolabi, Onikepe O. Giorgio, Margaret Leong, Ellie Sully, Elizabeth The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title | The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title_full | The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title_fullStr | The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title_full_unstemmed | The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title_short | The confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
title_sort | confidante method to measure abortion: implementing a standardized comparative analysis approach across seven contexts |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10369773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37491276 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12963-023-00310-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT owolabionikepeo theconfidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT giorgiomargaret theconfidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT leongellie theconfidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT sullyelizabeth theconfidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT owolabionikepeo confidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT giorgiomargaret confidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT leongellie confidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts AT sullyelizabeth confidantemethodtomeasureabortionimplementingastandardizedcomparativeanalysisapproachacrosssevencontexts |