Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 373

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 access
Barrett, G, Smith, S C, Wellings, K·2004·Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
DOI 10.1136/jech.2003.014787
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jech.2003.014787

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 373

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
DOI
10.1136/jech.2003.014787
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

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.