The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Provider Bias in Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) Promotion and Removal: Perceptions of Young Adult Women
Open accessAbstract
Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is effective and acceptable. However, concern exists about potential provider bias in LARC promotion. No study has documented contraceptive users’ attitudes toward or experiences with provider influence and bias regarding LARC. We collected qualitative data in 2014 to address this gap. Participants were 50 young adult women with any history of contraceptive use (including LARC) in Dane County, Wisconsin. Women often described providers as a trusted source of contraceptive information. However, several women reported that their preferences regarding contraceptive selection or removal were not honored. Furthermore, many participants believed that providers recommend LARC disproportionately to socially marginalized women. We encourage contraceptive counseling and removal protocols that directly address historical reproductive injustices and that honor patients’ wishes.
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
Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook
(1994) · Journal of Environmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0272-4944(05)80231-2 · Cited by 48,420
(1997) · Penn Carey Law Legal Scholarship Repository (University of Pennsylvania) · Cited by 2,736
Contraceptive failure in the United States
Trussell, J. (2011) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.01.021 · Cited by 1,588
Shifts in Intended and Unintended Pregnancies in the United States, 2001–2008
Finer, L. B., & Zolna, M. R. (2014) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2013.301416 · Cited by 770
Continuation and Satisfaction of Reversible Contraception
Peipert, J. F., Zhao, Q., Allsworth, J. E., Petrosky, E., Madden, T., Eisenberg, D., & Secura, G. (2011) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31821188ad · Cited by 564
Current Contraceptive Status Among Women Aged 15-49: United States, 2017-2019.
Daniels, K. M., & Abma, J. C. (2020) · PubMed · Cited by 476
Gomez, A. M., Fuentes, L., & Allina, A. (2014) · Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health · doi:10.1363/46e1614 · Cited by 379
Current contraceptive status among women aged 15-44: United States, 2011-2013.
Daniels, K. M., Daugherty, J., & Jones, J. (2014) · PubMed · Cited by 356
Women's preferences for contraceptive counseling and decision making
Dehlendorf, C., Levy, K., Kelley, A., Grumbach, K., & Steinauer, J. (2013) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.10.012 · Cited by 285
Changes in Use of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods Among U.S. Women, 2009–2012
Kavanaugh, M. L., Jerman, J., & Finer, L. B. (2015) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000001094 · Cited by 284
Cited by
“We’re a Little Biased”: Medicine and the Management of Bias through the Case of Contraception
Manzer, J. L., & Bell, A. V. (2021) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.1177/00221465211003232 · Cited by 58
Senderowicz, L., Sokol, N., Pearson, E., Francis, J., Ulenga, N., & Bärnighausen, T. (2023) · Health Policy and Planning · doi:10.1093/heapol/czac094 · Cited by 15
Finkbeiner, C., Doria, C., Ellis-Kahana, J., & Loder, C. M. (2021) · Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004297 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Higgins, J. A., Kramer, R. D., & Ryder, K. M.
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 2016-11
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1932-1937
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- OpenAlex
- W2520003249
- Cited by
- 316
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 16.02
- 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: Provider Bias in Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) Promotion and Removal: Perceptions of Young Adult Women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2105/ajph.2016.303393
- The paper
- Higgins, J. A., Kramer, R. D., & Ryder, K. M. (2016). Provider Bias in Long-Acting Reversible Contraception (LARC) Promotion and Removal: Perceptions of Young Adult Women. American Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2016.303393
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.
