INTRODUCTION: Concerns about safety and side effects from contraceptives are widespread and related to reluctance to use them. Measuring these concerns is an essential component of understanding contraceptive decision-making and guiding contraceptive and interpregnancy clinical care. METHODS: We used qualitative research and item response theory to develop and test a psychometric instrument to measure contraceptive concerns and beliefs. We developed 55 candidate scale items and tested them among 572 adolescents and adults across nine California healthcare facilities in 2019-2020. We derived a 6-item scale and assessed differences by age and social determinants of health with multivariable regression. RESULTS: In qualitative data, participants voiced both concerns and positive beliefs about contraception. Quantitative survey respondents were aged 21 years on average, and 24% were parous. Over half (54%) worried contraception has dangerous side effects, and 39% worried it is unnatural. The mean Contraceptive Concerns score, increasing with higher concerns, was 1.85 (SD: 1.00, range 0-4, α = 0.81). Items fit a partial credit item response model and met prespecified criteria for internal structure validity. Contraceptive use declined with increasing Concerns score (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 0.81 [0.72-0.92]). Scores were elevated among Black (mean: 2.06; aβ = 0.34 [0.09, 0.59]) and Multiracial or other race (2.11; aβ = 0.34 [0.02, 0.66]) respondents vs. White (1.66), but not Latinx respondents (1.81; aβ = 0.11 [- 0.11, 0.33]). Scores were also elevated among participants with lower maternal education (high school/Associates 1.89 versus college 1.60; aβ = 0.28 [0.04, 0.53]). DISCUSSION: The psychometrically robust Concerns instrument can be used in research to measure autonomous contraceptive decision-making and to design person-centered care.

Background

Patient agency in contraceptive decision-making is an essential component of reproductive autonomy.

Objective

We aimed to develop a psychometrically robust measure of patient contraceptive agency in the clinic visit, as a measure does not yet exist.

Design

For scale development, we generated and field tested 54 questionnaire items, grounded in qualitative research. We used item response theory-based methods to select and evaluate scale items for psychometric performance. We iteratively examined model fit, dimensionality, internal consistency, internal structure validity, and differential item functioning to arrive at a final scale.

Participants

A racially/ethnically diverse sample of 338 individuals, aged 15-34 years, receiving contraceptive care across nine California clinics in 2019-2020.

Main measures

Contraceptive Agency Scale (CAS) of patient agency in preventive care.

Key results

Participants were 20.5 mean years, with 36% identifying as Latinx, 26% White, 20% Black, 10% Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Scale items covered the domains of freedom from coercion, non-judgmental care, and active decision-making, and loaded on to a single factor, with a Cronbach's α of 0.80. Item responses fit a unidimensional partial credit item response model (weighted mean square statistic within 0.75-1.33 for each item), met criteria for internal structure validity, and showed no meaningful differential item functioning. Most participants expressed high agency in their contraceptive visit (mean score 9.6 out of 14). One-fifth, however, experienced low agency or coercion, with the provider wanting them to use a specific method or to make decisions for them. Agency scores were lowest among Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander participants (adjusted coefficient: -1.5 [-2.9, -0.1] vs. White) and among those whose mothers had less than a high school education (adjusted coefficient; -2.1 [-3.3, -0.8] vs. college degree or more).

Conclusions

The Contraceptive Agency Scale can be used in research and clinical care to reinforce non-coercive service provision as a standard of care.

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a potential strategy for addressing challenges in accurate estimation of abortion incidence, but it relies on often untested assumptions. We conducted an RDS study to estimate the cumulative lifetime incidence of abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa (April-December 2018), to evaluate whether RDS assumptions were met, and to compare RDS estimates of incidence with estimates adjusted for employment and age based on census data. A total of 849 participants were recruited from 11 seed participants between April and December 2018. The assumption that individuals can identify target population members and the assumption of approximation of sampling with replacement was met. There were minor violations of the assumptions of seed independence from the final sample and reciprocity of ties. Assumptions of accurate degree reporting and random recruitment were not met. Failure to meet assumptions yielded a study sample with different employment characteristics than those of the target population; this could not be resolved by standard RDS methods. The RDS estimate of cumulative lifetime abortion incidence was 12.1% (95% confidence interval: 9.8, 14.3), and the employment-adjusted estimate was 16.9% (95% confidence interval: 12.8, 22.1). We caution researchers in using RDS for representative estimates of abortion incidence. Use of postsurvey weights to adjust for differences in characteristics between the sample and the target population may yield more representative results.

Introduction

Agency in contraceptive decision-making is an essential aspect of reproductive autonomy. We conducted qualitative research to investigate what agency means to patients seeking contraceptive care to inform the development of a validated measure of this construct.

Methodology

We held four focus group discussions and seven interviews with sexually-active individuals assigned female at birth, ages 16-29 years, recruited from reproductive health clinics in Northern California. We explored experiences in contraceptive decision-making during the clinic visit. We coded data in ATLAS.ti and by hand, compared codes across three coders, and used thematic analysis to identify salient themes.

Results

The sample mean age was 21 years, with 17% of participants identifying as Asian, 23% as Black, 27% as Latinx, 17% as Multiracial/other, and 27% as white. Overall, participants reported active and engaged decision-making in their recent contraceptive visit but noted experiences that had undermined their agency in the past. They described how non-judgmental care allowed them to communicate openly, affirming their ability to make their own decisions. However, several mentioned how unexpected contraceptive side effects after the visit had reduced their sense of agency over their decision in retrospect. Several participants, including those who identified as Black, Latinx, and/or Asian, described prior experiences where pressure to use a contraceptive method had undermined their agency and where they had switched providers to regain agency over their contraceptive decisions.

Discussion

Most participants were aware of their agency during contraceptive visits and how it varied in different experiences with providers and the healthcare system. Patient perspectives can help to inform measurement development and ultimately the delivery of care that supports contraceptive agency.