No abstract

No abstract

Expectations to share data underlying studies are increasing, but research on how participants, particularly those in qualitative research, respond to requests for data sharing is limited. We studied research participants’ willingness to, understanding of, and motivations for data sharing. As part of a larger qualitative study on abortion reporting, we conducted interviews with 64 cisgender women in two states in early 2020 and asked for consent to share de-identified data. At the end of interviews, we asked participants to reflect on their motivations for agreeing or declining to share their data. The vast majority of respondents consented to data sharing and reported that helping others was a primary motivation for agreeing to share their data. However, a substantial number of participants showed a limited understanding of the concept of “data sharing.” Additional research is needed on how to improve participants’ understanding of data sharing and thus ensure fully informed consent.

Key Points Seven in 10 U.S. women of reproductive age, some 44 million women, make at least one medical visit to obtain sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services each year. While the overall number of women receiving any SRH service remained relatively stable between 2006–2010 and 2015–2019, the number of women receiving preventive gynecologic care fell and the number receiving STI testing doubled. Disparities in use of SRH services persist, as Hispanic women are significantly less likely than non-Hispanic White women to receive SRH services, and uninsured women are significantly less likely to receive services than privately insured women. Publicly funded clinics remain critical sources of SRH care for many women, with younger women, lower income women, women of color, foreign-born women, women with Medicaid coverage and women who are uninsured especially likely to rely on publicly funded clinics. Among women who go to clinics for SRH care, two-thirds report that the clinic is their usual source for medical care. Among those relying on both private providers and public clinics, the proportion of women who reported receiving a combination of contraceptive and STI/HIV care increased between 2006–2010 and 2015–2019. Implementation of the Affordable Care Act has likely contributed to some of the changes observed in where women receive contraceptive and other SRH services and how they pay for that care: The share of women receiving contraceptive services who go to private providers rose from 69% to 77% between 2006–2010 and 2015–2019, in part because more women gained private or public health insurance coverage and there was a greater likelihood that their health insurance would cover SRH services. There was a complementary drop in the share of women receiving contraceptive services who went to a publicly funded clinic, from 27% in 2006–2010 to 18% in 2015–2019. For non-Hispanic Black women, immigrant women and uninsured women, there was no increase in the use of private providers for contraceptive care from 2006–2010 to 2015–2019. Among women served at publicly funded clinics between 2006–2010 and 2015–2019, there were significant increases in the use of both public and private insurance to pay for their care.

In this report, we analyze the 2021 data, focusing on how respondents feel the COVID-19 pandemic has influenced their sexual and reproductive health in two core areas: fertility preferences and access to care, including use of telehealth. We note disparities according to individuals’ race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, income level and economic well-being. To assess the ongoing scope and magnitude of the impacts of the pandemic, we also examine findings on comparable measures from the 2020 and 2021 GSRHE studies. These data provide four key findings: The pandemic has continued to shift fertility preferences and impede access to sexual and reproductive health care, including contraceptive services. The impacts reported in the summer of 2021 are smaller than those reported earlier in the pandemic but remain pervasive. The pandemic continues to have disproportionate effects on the sexual and reproductive health of those already experiencing systemic social and health inequities. Telehealth services are bridging gaps in sexual and reproductive health care resulting from pandemic-related upheaval, particularly for those who already experience barriers to accessing health care.

Past research on gender-based violence (GBV) in Pakistan discusses intimate partner violence (IPV) and non-partner sexual violence (NPSV) but lacks a comprehensive analysis of violence against women and girls (VAWG) and its wider costs and impacts. Our study on the social costs of VAWG aims to fill this gap. Through in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs) in rural and urban Pakistan, we explore the types of VAWG that manifest in communities and examine the negative impacts these have on survivors, their families and communities. Our findings reveal that, in addition to the mental health impacts of VAWG on survivors (such as anxiety and suicidal ideation exacerbated by stigma and isolation), a number of social and economic impacts are borne by survivors as well as their relatives and communities. Social norms and institutions that condone and reproduce gender inequity contribute to the acceptance and normalization of VAWG. Lack of service provision and shelter for survivors and social stigma around seeking help heightens the impacts faced by survivors, their families and their communities.

Objectives. To investigate trends in the use and quality of telehealth for contraceptive care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Methods. The 2021 Guttmacher Survey of Reproductive Health Experiences is a national online survey of 6211 people assigned female at birth, aged 18 to 49 years, and that ever had penile‒vaginal sex. We used weighted bivariable and multivariable logistic regressions to analyze the use of telehealth for contraceptive care and the quality of this care. Results. Of the respondents, 34% received a contraceptive service in the 6 months before the survey; of this group, 17% utilized telehealth. Respondents who were uninsured at some point in the 6 months before the survey had greater odds of using telehealth for this care. Respondents had lower odds of rating the person-centeredness of their care as “excellent” if they received services via telehealth compared with in person (25% vs 39%). Conclusions. Telehealth has helped bridge gaps in contraceptive care deepened by COVID-19. More work is needed to improve the quality of care and reduce access barriers to ensure telehealth can meet its full potential as part of a spectrum of care options. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(S5):S545–S554. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306886 )

Abortion is a difficult-to-measure behaviour with extensive underreporting in surveys, which compromises the ability to study and monitor it. We aimed to improve understanding of how women interpret and respond to survey items asking if they have had an abortion. We developed new questions hypothesised to improve abortion reporting, using approaches that aim to clarify which experiences to report; reduce the stigma and sensitivity of abortion; reduce the sense of intrusiveness of asking about abortion; and increase respondent motivation to report. We conducted cognitive interviews with cisgender women aged 18–49 in two US states ( N = 64) to assess these new approaches and questions for improving abortion reporting. Our findings suggest that including abortion as part of a list of other sexual and reproductive health services, asking a yes/no question about lifetime experience of abortion instead of asking about number of abortions, and developing an improved introduction to abortion questions may help to elicit more accurate survey reports. Opportunities exist to improve survey measurement of abortion. Reducing the underreporting of abortion in surveys has the potential to improve sexual and reproductive health research that relies on pregnancy histories.