The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Women's preferences for contraceptive counseling and decision making
Open accessAbstract
Background Little is known about what women value in their interactions with family planning providers and in decision making about contraception. Study Design We conducted semistructured interviews with 42 black, white and Latina patients. Transcripts were coded using modified grounded theory. Results While women wanted control over the ultimate selection of a method, most also wanted their provider to participate in the decision-making process in a way that emphasized the women’s values and preferences. Women desired an intimate, friend-like relationship with their providers and also wanted to receive comprehensive information about options, particularly about side effects. More black and Spanish-speaking Latinas, as compared to whites and English-speaking Latinas, felt that providers should only share their opinion if it is elicited by a patient or if they make their rationale clear to the patient. Conclusion While, in the absence of medical contraindications, decision making about contraception has often been conceptualized as a woman’s autonomous decision, our data indicate that providers of contraceptive counseling can participate in the decision-making process within limits. Differences in preferences seen by race/ethnicity illustrate one example of the importance of individualizing counseling to match women’s preferences.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Unequal treatment: confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care
(2003) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-5843 · Cited by 7,043
Charles, C., Gafni, A., & Whelan, T. (1997) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(96)00221-3 · Cited by 4,137 · cited 1×
“[23], which divides the decision making process into three phases: information sharing, deliberation and decision making.”
BackgroundHalpern, J. (2003) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x · Cited by 710
Hu, X. H., Bull, S. A., Hunkeler, E. M., Ming, E., Lee, J. Y., Fireman, B., & Markson, L. E. (2004) · The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · doi:10.4088/jcp.v65n0712 · Cited by 235 · cited 1×
“Evidence that discussion of negative side effects does not affect patient adherence, and may in fact be beneficial, supports this practice [36–39].”
Result
Cited by
Higgins, J. A., Kramer, R. D., & Ryder, K. M. (2016) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2016.303393 · Cited by 316
Metadata
- Authors
- Dehlendorf, C., Levy, K., Kelley, A., Grumbach, K., & Steinauer, J.
- Venue
- Contraception
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-08
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 250-256
- ISSN
- 0010-7824 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2045500121
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 9.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Women's preferences for contraceptive counseling and decision making. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.012
- The paper
- Dehlendorf, C., Levy, K., Kelley, A., Grumbach, K., & Steinauer, J. (2013). Women's preferences for contraceptive counseling and decision making. Contraception. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.012
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.