The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptualisation, development, and evaluation of a measure of unplanned pregnancy
Open accessAbstract
Study objective: To develop a measure of unplanned pregnancy that is valid, reliable, and appropriate in the context of contemporary demographic trends and social mores and can be used in a variety of situations, including the production of population prevalence estimates. Design: A two stage study design: qualitative (inductive) methods to delineate the construct of pregnancy planning, and quantitative/psychometric methods to establish the means of measurement. Setting: Eight health service providers (comprising 14 clinics, including antenatal, abortion, and one general practitioner) across London, Edinburgh, Hertfordshire, Salisbury, and Southampton in the UK. Participants: Samples comprised a mixture of pregnant (continuing pregnancy and opting for abortion) and recently pregnant (post-abortion and postnatal) women. At the qualitative stage, 47 women took part in depth interviews (20 of whom were re-interviewed after the birth of their baby). Items were pre-tested with 26 women, and two psychometric field tests were carried out with, respectively, 390 and 651 women. Main results: A six item measure of unplanned pregnancy was produced. Psychometric testing demonstrated the measure’s high reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.92; test-retest reliability = 0.97) and high face, content, and construct validity. Women’s positions in relation to pregnancy planning are represented by the range of scores (0–12). Conclusions: A psychometric measure of unplanned pregnancy, the development of which was informed by lay views, is now available. The measure is suitable for use with any pregnancy regardless of outcome (that is, birth, abortion, miscarriage) and is highly acceptable to women.
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
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests
Cronbach, L. J. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02310555 · Cited by 43,931
(1991) · Cited by 15,554
SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide
Ware, J. (2003) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,424
Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use
Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (1989) · Cited by 9,595
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, Jr., Robert P., R., Richard L., C., & Brad, S. (1975) · doi:10.21236/ada006655 · Cited by 3,497
Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria
Lohr, K. N. (2002) · Quality of Life Research · doi:10.1023/a:1015291021312 · Cited by 2,269
Kincaid, J. P., Robert, P. F. L., Richard, L. R., & Brad, S. (1975) · Cited by 739
The Measurement and Meaning of Unintended Pregnancy
Santelli, J., Rochat, R., Hatfield-Timajchy, K., Gilbert, B. C., Curtis, K., Cabral, R., Hirsch, J. S., & Schieve, L. (2003) · Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health · doi:10.1111/j.1931-2393.2003.tb00111.x · Cited by 738
The Best Intentions: Unintended Pregnancy and the Well-Being of Children and Families
Guttmacher, S., Brown, S. S., & Eisenberg, L. (1998) · Journal of Public Health Policy · doi:10.2307/3343096 · Cited by 710
Cited by
Stephenson, J., Heslehurst, N., Hall, J., Schoenaker, D. A. J. M., Hutchinson, J., Cade, J. E., Poston, L., Barrett, G., Crozier, S. R., Barker, M., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30311-8 · Cited by 1,222
Self-citationUnintended pregnancy: worldwide levels, trends, and outcomes.
Singh, S., Sedgh, G., & Hussain, R. (2010) · Studies in Family Planning · doi:10.1111/j.1728-4465.2010.00250.x · Cited by 731
Bearak, J., Popinchalk, A., Alkema, L., & Sedgh, G. (2018) · The Lancet Global Health · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(18)30029-9 · Cited by 691
Disparities in family planning
Dehlendorf, C., Rodriguez, M. I., Levy, K., Borrero, S., & Steinauer, J. (2010) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.022 · Cited by 414
Stephenson, J., Patel, D., Barrett, G., Howden, B., Copas, A., Ojukwu, O., Pandya, P., & Shawe, J. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103085 · Cited by 210
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Barrett, G., Smith, S. C., & Wellings, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2004-04-13
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 426-433
- ISSN
- 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
- 0143-005X
- 1470-2738
- OpenAlex
- W2079898146
- Cited by
- 373
- References
- 32
- FWCI
- 4.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Conceptualisation, development, and evaluation of a measure of unplanned pregnancy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jech.2003.014787
- The paper
- Barrett, G., Smith, S. C., & Wellings, K. (2004). Conceptualisation, development, and evaluation of a measure of unplanned pregnancy. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2003.014787
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.