↓ Skip to main content

Protocol for a systematic review on the effect of demand generation interventions on uptake and use of modern contraceptives in LMIC

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 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
Protocol for a systematic review on the effect of demand generation interventions on uptake and use of modern contraceptives in LMIC
Published in
Systematic Reviews, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13643-015-0102-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Loubna Belaid, Alexandre Dumont, Nils Chaillet, Vincent De Brouwere, Amel Zertal, Sennen Hounton, Valéry Ridde

Abstract

Despite a global increase in contraception use, its prevalence remains low in low- and middle-income countries. One strategy to improve uptake and use of contraception, as an essential complement to policies and supply-side interventions, is demand generation. Demand generation interventions have reportedly produced positive effects on uptake and use of family planning services, but the evidence base remains poorly documented. To reduce this knowledge gap, we will conduct a systematic review on the impact of demand generation interventions on the use of modern contraception. The objectives of the review will be as follows: (1) to synthesize evidence on the impacts and costs of family planning demand generation interventions and on their effectiveness in improving modern contraceptive use and (2) to identify the indicators used to assess effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and impacts of demand generation interventions. We will systematically review the public health and health promotion literature in several databases (e.g., CINAHL, Medline, EMBASE) as well as gray literature. We will select articles from 1970 to 2015, in French and in English. The review will include studies that assess the impact of family planning programs or interventions on changes in contraception use. The studied interventions will be those with a demand generation component, even if a supply component is implemented. Two members of the team will independently search, screen, extract data, and assess the quality of the studies selected. Different tools will be used to assess the quality of the studies depending on the study design. If appropriate, a meta-analysis will be conducted. The analysis will involve comparing odd ratios (OR) DISCUSSION: The systematic review results will be disseminated to United Nations Population Fund program countries and will contribute to the development of a guidance document and programmatic tools for planning, implementing, and evaluating demand generation interventions in family planning. Improving the effectiveness of family planning programs is critical for empowering women and adolescent girls, improving human capital, reducing dependency ratios, reducing maternal and child mortality, and achieving demographic dividends in low- and middle-income countries. This protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42015017549).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 117 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 18%
Researcher 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 38 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 14%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Psychology 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 38 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 13 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,518,735
of 25,271,884 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,084
of 2,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,249
of 281,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#12
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,271,884 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 281,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.