Assessing the Reliability of the Retrospective Reproductive Calendar
Evidence from Urban Kenya
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10797564 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Katherine Tumlinson (0000-0001-8314-8219, Department of Maternal and Child Health Gillings School of Global Public Health University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) Chapel Hill NC, corresponding author), Siân L Curtis (Department of Maternal and Child Health Gillings School of Global Public Health University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) Chapel Hill NC), Siân Curtis (0000-0001-5225-860X, University of North Carolina Health Care, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 467-486 |
| Publication date | 2021-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Studies in Family Planning (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0039-3665 • E-ISSN: 1728-4465 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/sifp.12173 |
| PMID | 34390002 |
| OpenAlex | W3191506557 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 14 |
The reproductive calendar is a data collection tool that collects month‐by‐month retrospective histories of contraceptive use. This survey instrument is implemented in large‐scale demographic surveys, but its reliability is not well‐understood. Our analysis helps to address this research gap, using longitudinal panel data with overlapping calendars from urban Kenya. Our findings indicate calendar data collected in 2014 underestimated 2012 reports of current use by 5 percentage points. And while the overall percentage of women reporting at least one episode of contraceptive use was similar across the two calendars (67 percent vs. 70 percent), there was notable disagreement in contraceptive behavior when comparing the histories of individual women; less than 20 percent of women with any contraceptive use reported the exact same pattern of use in both calendars. Low calendar reliability was especially apparent for younger women and those with complicated contraceptive histories. Individual‐level discordance resulted in a small difference in 12‐month discontinuation rates for the period of calendar overlap; when surveyed in 2014, women reported a 12‐month discontinuation rate of 39 percent, compared to a rate of 34 percent reported in 2012. When using retrospective calendar data, attention must be paid to the potential for individual reporting errors
Data collection · Discontinuation · Environmental health · Family planning · Fertility · Population · Research methodology · Retrospective cohort study · Statistics · Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health · Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences · Demography · Global Maternal and Child Health · Medicine
Contraceptive discontinuation, switching, abandonment and their reproductive consequences
Demographic and Fertility Characteristics of Contraceptive Clusters in Burundi
Contraceptive Behavior Dynamics and Unintended Pregnancy
Characteristics Associated with Reliability in Reporting of Contraceptive Use
Stop or Switch
The Reliability of Contraceptive Discontinuation Reporting in Burkina Faso, Kenya, and Uganda
Measuring the Impact of Armed Conflict on Population Health
Fertility Responses to the Covid‐19 Pandemic
Does the fulfillment of contraceptive method preferences affect contraceptive continuation? Evidence from urban Kenya, Nigeria, and Senegal
Fertility change in Costa Rica 1960–84
Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions
Maternal deaths averted by contraceptive use
Family planning
Adolescent Pregnancy
Contraception and health
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Reducing Unmet Need by Supporting Women with Met Need
Patterns and Trends in Adolescents' Contraceptive Use and Discontinuation in Developing Countries and Comparisons With Adult Women
Collection of Survey Data on Contraception
The Reliability of Reporting of Contraceptive Behavior in DHS Calendar Data
The Reliability of Calendar Data for Reporting Contraceptive Use
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1.8 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2026 (6) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 9 |