↓ Skip to main content

Inequality in fertility rate and modern contraceptive use among Ghanaian women from 1988–2008

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Inequality in fertility rate and modern contraceptive use among Ghanaian women from 1988–2008
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-12-37
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benedict O Asamoah, Anette Agardh, Per-Olof Östergren

Abstract

In most resource poor countries, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, modern contraceptive use and prevalence is unusually low and fertility is very high resulting in rapid population growth and high maternal mortality and morbidity. Current evidence shows slow progress in expanding the use of contraceptives by women of low socioeconomic status and insufficient financial commitment to family planning programs. We examined gaps and trends in modern contraceptive use and fertility within different socio-demographic subgroups in Ghana between 1988 and 2008. We constructed a database using the Women's Questionnaire from the Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS) 1988, 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008. We applied regression-based Total Attributable Fraction (TAF); we also calculated the Relative and Slope Indices of Inequality (RII and SII) to complement the TAF in our investigation. Equality in use of modern contraceptives increased from 1988 to 2008. In contrast, inequality in fertility rate increased from 1988 to 2008. It was also found that rural-urban residence gap in the use of modern contraceptive methods had almost disappeared in 2008, while education and income related inequalities remained. One obvious observation is that the discrepancy between equality in use of contraceptives and equality in fertility must be addressed in a future revision of policies related to family planning. Otherwise this could be a major obstacle for attaining further progress in achieving the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 5. More research into the causes of the unfortunate discrepancy is urgently needed. There still exist significant education and income related inequalities in both parameters that need appropriate action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 130 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 19%
Researcher 24 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 21 16%
Unknown 29 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 25%
Social Sciences 25 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Unspecified 4 3%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 34 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2013.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#2,168
of 2,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,600
of 207,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#24
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 207,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.