Values and preferences for contraception: A global systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To identify and synthesize original research on contraceptive user values, preferences, views, and concerns about specific family planning methods, as well as perspectives from health workers.Study design
We conducted a systematic review of global contraceptive user values and preferences. We searched 10 electronic databases for qualitative and quantitative studies published from 2005 to 2020 and extracted data in duplicate using standard forms.Results
Overall, 423 original research articles from 93 countries among various groups of end-users and health workers in all 6 World Health Organization regions and all 4 World Bank income classification categories met inclusion criteria. Of these, 250 (59%) articles were from high-income countries, mostly from the United States of America (n = 139), the United Kingdom (n = 29), and Australia (n = 23). Quantitative methods were used in 269 articles, most often cross-sectional surveys (n = 190). Qualitative interviews were used in 116 articles and focus group discussions in 69 articles. The most commonly reported themes included side effects, effectiveness, and ease/frequency/duration of use. Interference in sex and partner relations, menstrual effects, reversibility, counseling/interactions with health workers, cost/availability, autonomy, and discreet use were also important. Users generally reported satisfaction with (and more accurate knowledge about) the methods they were using.Conclusions
Contraceptive users have diverse values and preferences, although there is consistency in core themes across settings. Despite the large body of literature identified and relevance to person-centered care, varied reporting of findings limited robust synthesis and quantification of the review results.
SUBMITTER: Yeh PT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9232836 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveWe sought to systematically review the literature on health workers' values and preferences related to contraceptive methods.Study designAs part of a larger review, we searched ten electronic databases for published articles from January 1, 2005 through July 27, 2020. We included studies that reported qualitative or quantitative data from the perspective of health workers providing family planning services globally.ResultsForty-one studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies included 12,643 health workers and were conducted in 27 countries. Health worker values and preferences for contraceptive methods were affected by factors related to contraceptive method characteristics (e.g., bleeding pattern and convenience), the contraceptive user (e.g., medical history, parity), and the health worker themselves (e.g., training, environment). Differences were also noted between various professions/specialties (e.g., comfort level with contraceptive methods, depth of experience). While contraceptive counseling and provision were influenced by health worker values and preferences, they were also affected by health worker misconceptions and biases.ConclusionHealth worker values and preferences for contraception are affected by the client's history, medical eligibility, and the health worker context. Provision of contraception that is affected by harmful bias towards certain populations or about certain methods can negatively affect patient-centered care. Future work should address knowledge gaps and health worker biases by improving and standardizing education and training globally, to ensure high-quality, rights-based, and patient-centered contraceptive services.
| S-EPMC9233149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is still lack of consensus on the benefit-harm balance of breast cancer screening. In this scenario, women's values and preferences are crucial for developing health-related recommendations. In the context of the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer, we conducted a systematic review to inform the European Breast Guidelines.MethodsWe searched Medline and included primary studies assessing women's values and preferences regarding breast cancer screening and diagnosis decision making. We used a thematic approach to synthesise relevant data. The quality of evidence was determined with GRADE, including GRADE CERQual for qualitative research.ResultsWe included 22 individual studies. Women were willing to accept the psychological and physical burden of breast cancer screening and a significant risk of overdiagnosis and false-positive mammography findings, in return for the benefit of earlier diagnosis. The anxiety engendered by the delay in getting results of diagnostic tests was highlighted as a significant burden, emphasising the need for rapid and efficient screening services, and clear and efficient communication. The confidence in the findings was low to moderate for screening and moderate for diagnosis, predominantly because of methodological limitations, lack of adequate understanding of the outcomes by participants, and indirectness.ConclusionsWomen value more the possibility of an earlier diagnosis over the risks of a false-positive result or overdiagnosis. Concerns remain that women may not understand the concept of overdiagnosis. Women highly value time efficient screening processes and rapid result delivery and will accept some discomfort for the peace of mind screening may provide.
| S-EPMC6594004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ContextAdvances in systemic agents have increased overall survival for men diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer. Additional cytoreductive prostate treatments and metastasis-directed therapies are under evaluation. These confer toxicity but may offer incremental survival benefits. Thus, an understanding of patients' values and treatment preferences is important for counselling, decision-making, and guideline development.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of patients' values, preferences, and expectations regarding treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.Evidence acquisitionThe MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases were systematically searched for qualitative and preference elucidation studies reporting on patients' preferences for treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) or GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (CERQual). The protocol was registered on PROSPERO as CRD42020201420.Evidence synthesisA total of 1491 participants from 15 studies met the prespecified eligibility for inclusion. The study designs included were discrete choice experiments (n = 5), mixed methods (n = 3), and qualitative methods (n = 7). Disease states reported per study were: metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in nine studies (60.0%), metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in two studies (13.3%), and a mixed cohort in four studies (26.6%). In quantitative preference elicitation studies, patients consistently valued treatment effectiveness and delay in time to symptoms as the two top-ranked treatment attributes (low or very low certainty). Patients were willing to trade off treatment-related toxicity for potential oncological benefits (low certainty). In qualitative studies, thematic analysis revealed cancer progression and/or survival, pain, and fatigue as key components in treatment decisions (low or very low certainty). Patients continue to value oncological benefits in making decisions on treatments under qualitative assessment.ConclusionsThere is limited understanding of how patients make treatment and trade-off decisions following a diagnosis of metastatic prostate cancer. For appropriate investment in emerging cytoreductive local tumour and metastasis-directed therapies, we should seek to better understand how this cohort weighs the oncological benefits against the risks.Patient summaryWe looked at how men with advanced (metastatic) prostate cancer make treatment decisions. We found that little is known about patients' preferences for current and proposed new treatments. Further studies are required to understand how patients make decisions to help guide the integration of new treatments into the standard of care.
| S-EPMC8703228 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Values and preferences relate to the importance that patients place on health outcomes (eg, bleeding, having a deep venous thrombosis) and are essential when weighing benefits and harms in guideline recommendations. To inform the American Society of Hematology guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism (VTE) disease, we conducted a systematic review of patients' values and preferences related to VTE. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception to April of 2018 (PROSPERO-CRD42018094003). We included quantitative and qualitative studies. We followed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidance for rating the certainty and presenting findings for quantitative research about the relative importance of health outcomes and a grounded theory approach for qualitative thematic synthesis. We identified 14 quantitative studies (2465 participants) describing the relative importance of VTE-related health states in a widely diverse population of patients, showing overall small to important impact on patients' lives (certainty of the evidence from low to moderate). Additionally, evidence from 34 quantitative studies (6424 participants) and 15 qualitative studies (570 participants) revealed that patients put higher value on VTE risk reduction than on the potential harms of the treatment (certainty of evidence from low to moderate). Studies also suggested a clear preference for oral medication over subcutaneous medication (moderate certainty). The observed variability in health state values may be a result of differences in the approaches used to elicit them and the diversity of included populations rather than true variability in values. This finding highlights the necessity to explore the variability induced by different approaches to ascertain values.
| S-EPMC7065473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate men's values and preferences regarding prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and grey literature up to 2 September 2017.Eligibility criteriaPrimary studies of men's values and preferences regarding the benefits and harms of PSA screening.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with a modified version of a risk of bias tool for values and preferences studies, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument V.3 and the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool.ResultsWe identified 4172 unique citations, of which 11 studies proved eligible. Five studies investigated PSA screening using a direct choice study design, whereas six used decisions aids displaying patient-important outcomes. The direct choice studies used different methodologies and varied considerably in the reporting of outcomes. Two studies suggested that men were willing to forego screening with a small benefit in prostate cancer mortality if it would decrease the likelihood of unnecessary treatment or biopsies. In contrast, one study reported that men were willing to accept a substantial overdiagnosis to reduce their risk of prostate cancer mortality. Among the six studies involving decision aids, willingness to undergo screening varied substantially from 37% when displaying a hypothetical reduction in mortality of 10 per 1000 men, to 44% when displaying a reduction in mortality of 7 per 1000. We found no studies that specifically investigated whether values and preferences differed among men with family history, of African descent or with lower socioeconomic levels.ConclusionThe variability of men's values and preferences reflect that the decision to screen is highly preference sensitive. Our review highlights the need for shared decision making in men considering prostate cancer screening.Trial registration numberCRD42018095585.
| S-EPMC6129096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo explore values and preferences towards medical cannabis among people living with chronic pain.DesignMixed-methods systematic review.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO from inception to 17 March 2020.Study selectionPairs of reviewers independently screened search results and included quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies reporting values and preferences towards medical cannabis among people living with chronic pain.Review methodsWe analysed data using meta-narrative synthesis (quantitative findings were qualitised) and tabulated review findings according to identified themes. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess certainty of evidence.ResultsOf 1838 initial records, 15 studies proved eligible for review. High to moderate certainty evidence showed that patient's use of medical cannabis for chronic pain was influenced by both positive (eg, support from friends and family) and negative social factors (eg, stigma surrounding cannabis use). Most patients using medical cannabis favoured products with balanced ratios of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), or high levels of CBD, but not high THC preparations. Many valued the effectiveness of medical cannabis for symptom management even when experiencing adverse events related to concentration, memory or fatigue. Reducing use of prescription medication was a motivating factor for use of medical cannabis, and concerns regarding addiction, losing control or acting strangely were disincentives. Out-of-pocket costs were a barrier, whereas legalisation of medical cannabis improved access and incentivised use.Low to very low certainty evidence suggested highly variable values towards medical cannabis among people living with chronic pain. Individuals with pain related to life-limiting disease were more willing to use medical cannabis, and preferred oral over inhaled administration.ConclusionsOur findings highlight factors that clinicians should consider when discussing medical cannabis. The variability of patients' values and preferences emphasise the need for shared decision making when considering medical cannabis for chronic pain.
| S-EPMC8451285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Although substantial generic knowledge about integrated care has been developed, better understanding of the factors that drive behaviour, decision-making, collaboration and governance processes in integrated care networks is needed to take integrated care forward. To gain more insight into these topics and to understand integrated care in more depth, a set of underlying values of integrated care has been developed and defined in this study. Theory and methods:A systematic literature review was conducted to identify the underlying values of integrated care. Values theory was used as a theoretical framework for the analysis. Results:This study identified 23 values in the current body of knowledge. The most frequently identified values are 'collaborative', 'co-ordinated', 'transparent', 'empowering', 'comprehensive', 'co-produced' and 'shared responsibility and accountability'. Discussion and conclusion:The set of values is presented as a potential basis for a values-driven approach to integrated care. This approach enables better understanding of the behaviours and collaboration in integrated care and may also be used to develop guidance or governance in this area. The practical application of the values and their use at multiple levels is discussed. The consequences of different stakeholder perceptions on the values is explored and an agenda for future research is proposed.
| S-EPMC6251066 | biostudies-other
Project description:Oral contraceptives (OCs) following induced abortion offer a reliable method to avoid repeated abortion. However, limited data exist supporting the effective use of OCs postabortion. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis in the present study reported immediate administration of OCs or combined OCs postabortion may reduce vaginal bleeding time and amount, shorten the menstruation recovery period, increase endometrial thickness 2 to 3 weeks after abortion, and reduce the risk of complications and unintended pregnancies.A total of 8 major authorized Chinese and English databases were screened from January 1960 to November 2014. Randomized controlled trials in which patients had undergone medical or surgical abortions were included. Chinese studies that met the inclusion criteria were divided into 3 groups: administration of OC postmedical abortion (group I; n = 1712), administration of OC postsurgical abortion (group II; n = 8788), and administration of OC in combination with traditional Chinese medicine postsurgical abortion (group III; n = 19,707).In total, 119 of 6160 publications were included in this analysis. Significant difference was observed in group I for vaginal bleeding time (P = 0.0001), the amount of vaginal bleeding (P = 0.03), and menstruation recovery period (P < 0.00001) compared with the control groups. Group II demonstrated a significant difference in vaginal bleeding time (P < 0.00001), the amount of vaginal bleeding (P = 0.0002), menstruation recovery period (P < 0.00001), and endometrial thickness at 2 (P = 0.003) and 3 (P < 0.00001) weeks postabortion compared with the control group. Similarly, a significant difference was observed in group III for reducing vaginal bleeding time (P < 0.00001) and the amount of vaginal bleeding (P < 0.00001), shortening the menstruation recovery period (P < 0.00001), and increasing endometrial thickness 2 and 3 weeks after surgical abortion (P < 0.00001, all).Immediate administration of OCs postabortion may reduce vaginal bleeding time and amount, shorten the menstruation recovery period, increase endometrial thickness 2 to 3 weeks after abortion, and reduce the risk of complications and unintended pregnancies.
| S-EPMC5058789 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEfficiently addressing patient priorities and concerns remains a challenge in oncology. Systematic operationalization of patient-centered care (PCC) can support improved assessment and practice of PCC in this unique care setting. This review aimed to synthesize the qualitative empirical literature exploring the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)'s PCC constructs of values, needs, and preferences among patients' during their cancer treatment experiences.MethodsA systematic review of qualitative studies published between 2002 and 2018 addressing adult patient values, needs, and preferences during cancer treatment was conducted. Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS databases were searched on September 10, 2018. Methodological rigor was assessed using a modified version of the Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies. Included study findings were analyzed using line-by-line coding; and the emergent themes were compared to the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)'s PCC dimensions.ResultsTwenty-nine primary studies were included in the synthesis. Descriptive themes for values (autonomy, being involved, family, hope, normality, and sincerity), needs (care coordination, information, privacy, support of physical well-being, emotional support (family/friends, peer, provider), and self-support), and preferences (care coordination, decision-making, information delivery, source of social support, and treatment) were identified. "Cancer care context" emerged as an important domain in which these constructs are operationalized. This thematic framework outlines PCC attributes that oncology care stakeholders can evaluate to improve patient experiences.ConclusionsThese findings build on previous PCC research and may contribute to the systematic assessment of patient priorities and the improvement of oncology care quality from the patient perspective.
| S-EPMC7901502 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Accessible and quality reproductive health services are critical for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). After a decade of waning investment in family planning, interest and funding are growing once again. This article assesses whether introducing, removing, or changing user fees for contraception has an effect on contraceptive use. We conducted a search of 14 international databases. We included randomized controlled trials, interrupted-time series analyses, controlled before-and-after study designs, and cohort studies that reported contraception-related variables as an outcome and a change in the price of contraceptives as an intervention. Four studies were eligible but none was at low risk of bias overall. Most of these, as well as other studies not included in the present research, found that demand for contraception was not cost-sensitive. We could draw no robust summary of evidence, strongly suggesting that further research in this area is needed.
| S-EPMC5434817 | biostudies-other