Cited by 4Reproductive Health and ContraceptionInternational Human Rights and Reproductive LawDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why bold policies for family planning are needed now

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.contraception.2013.01.001

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 4

Metadata

Authors
Potts, M., Weinrib, R., & Campbell, M.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author
Potts, Malcolm
Venue
Contraception
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-04
Volume
87
Issue
4
Pages
393-395
ISSN
0010-7824 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2084608159
Cited by
4
References
8
Citations by year
2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Contraception (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Human Rights and Reproductive Law
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Demographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Keywords
family planning, contraceptive access, contraception, global health policy, reproductive health, international development
MeSH terms
Contraception Behavior, Developing Countries, Female, Forecasting, Humans, Population Growth, Family Planning Policy

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: Why bold policies for family planning are needed now. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.contraception.2013.01.001
The paper
Potts, M., Weinrib, R., & Campbell, M. (2013). Why bold policies for family planning are needed now. Contraception. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2013.01.001