• Stud Fam Plann · Jun 2011

    Review

    What works in family planning interventions: a systematic review.

    • Lisa Mwaikambo, Ilene S Speizer, Anna Schurmann, Gwen Morgan, and Fariyal Fikree.
    • Center for Communication Programs, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA.
    • Stud Fam Plann. 2011 Jun 1; 42 (2): 67-82.

    AbstractThis study presents findings from a systematic review of evaluations of family planning interventions published between 1995 and 2008. Studies that used an experimental or quasi-experimental design or used another approach to attribute program exposure to observed changes in fertility or family planning outcomes at the individual or population levels were included and ranked by strength of evidence. A total of 63 studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings from this review are summarized in tabular format by the type of intervention (classified as supply-side or demand-side). About two-thirds of the studies found were evaluations of programs focusing on demand generation. Findings from all programs revealed significant improvements in knowledge, attitudes, discussion, and intentions. Program impacts on use of contraceptives and use of family planning services were less consistently found, and fewer than half of the studies that measured fertility or pregnancy-related outcomes found an impact. Based on the review findings, we identify promising programmatic approaches and propose directions for future evaluation research of family planning interventions.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.