Table 4.
Summary of strength of evidence from studies investigating associations between empowerment and family planning (FP) or related outcomes in reviewed articles (N = 46), by level of methological rigour according to USPSTF hierarchy
| Type of study | No. articles per type and grade | FP use | FP needs and intentions | Related FP outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
||||||
| Current use (n = 33) | Ever use (n = 8) | Future FP intentions (n = 6) | Unmet need (n = 2) | FP decisionmaking (n = 3) | Spousal communication (n = 2) | Othera (n = 8) | ||
| Type II-2 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Good | 2 | 21; 46 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fair | 1 | 27 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Poor | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Type II-3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Good | 1 | 61 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Fair | 1 | 41 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Poor | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Type III | 41 | 28 | 8 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 8 |
| Good | 31 | 4; 6; 7; 14; 16; 19; 23; 25; 28; 29; 30; 31; 32; 34; 38; 39; 40; 47; 48; 57; 58; 67; 88 | 3; 24; 30; 34; 35; 57; 65 | 7; 29; 30; 31; 39; 51 | 36; 66 | 25 | 24; 31 | 30; 31; 49; 51; 57 |
| Fair | 7 | 12; 17; 37 | 55 | — | — | 11 | — | 29; 64 |
| Poor | 4 | 10; 54 | — | — | — | 13 | — | 33 |
The overall numbers of articles that include findings related to each family planning outcome are indicated in parentheses. The number of articles within each family planning outcome are listed in bold according to the USPTF typography.
The total number of articles per type and grade exceeds the total number of articles included in the review because one article included different analyses for current and other outcomes, which received different grades.
The article reference numbers, as given in Table 3, are listed in italics according to the grade of evidence assigned during the review of evidence.
Articles include multiple outcomes so total outcomes examined (N = 65) exceed total articles reviewed (N = 46).
Eight articles included analyses for eleven outcomes because one article examined multiple ‘Other Family Planning outcomes’ which were counted separately.