Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N. Wolfe Street, 4th floor, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Stud Fam Plann. 2012 Sep;43(3):213-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2012.00319.x.
Collecting contraceptive-use data by means of calendar methods has become standard practice in large-scale population surveys, yet the reliability of these methods for capturing accurate contraceptive histories over time remains largely unknown. Using data from overlapping contraceptive calendars included in a longitudinal study of 3,080 rural Bangladeshi women, we assessed the consistency of reports from the baseline interview month in 2006 with reports from the same month in a follow-up survey three years later, and examined predictors of reliable reporting. More than one-third of women were discordant in their reports for the reference month in the two surveys. Among women reporting use of any contraceptive method for the reference month in both surveys, 25 percent reported different methods at the two time points. Women using condoms or traditional methods and those with more complex reproductive histories, including more births and more episodes of contraceptive use, were least likely to report reliably. (STUDIES IN FAMILY PLANNING
通过日历法收集避孕措施使用数据已经成为大规模人口调查中的标准做法,但这些方法在长时间内准确捕捉避孕史的可靠性在很大程度上仍不清楚。我们使用了一项针对 3080 名孟加拉国农村妇女的纵向研究中包含的重叠避孕日历的数据,评估了 2006 年基线访谈月份报告与三年后随访调查中同一月份报告的一致性,并研究了可靠报告的预测因素。超过三分之一的女性在两次调查中对参考月份的报告不一致。在两次调查中都报告参考月份使用任何避孕方法的女性中,有 25%的女性在两个时间点报告了不同的方法。使用避孕套或传统方法的女性以及生育史和避孕措施使用经历更复杂的女性(包括更多的生育和更多的避孕措施使用事件)最不可能可靠地报告。(计划生育研究