Suchergebnisse

Recall and understanding of information provided to contraceptive study participants in four sites were assessed. Analysis was completed of data for 70 women who were asked about their recollection of information and understanding of participation. Most women understood the purpose of the study. Their reasons for agreeing to participate varied by site and included wanting to try a new method, wanting to help others, and wishing to avoid pregnancy. Most women recalled correctly the burden of participation—number and frequency of visits, tests, and examinations. Most understood that they could withdraw from the study without jeopardizing their care. The women were also asked to recall the risks and benefits of the contraceptive they were testing. Only 23 percent recalled the pregnancy risk correctly; 40 percent underestimated and 19 percent overestimated it. Few women interpreted rates of risk correctly; some perceived high rates as low ones and the rates of the spermicide being studied as better than those of other contraceptives. This study confirms that risk is better recalled than understood. The participants surveyed remembered the information they were questioned about better than did participants in some other studies, a finding that supports earlier research results showing that younger, healthier patients (such as contraceptive users) recall better than older, less healthy ones.

The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of using maternal assessments of infant birth size as proxy measures for birth weight in Ecuador, a country in which a sizeable proportion of births take place at home, where birth weight is typically not recorded. Four thousand and seventy-eight women who experienced a live singleton birth between January 1992 and August 1994 were interviewed in the Ecuador Demographic and Maternal–Child Health Survey. All women were asked if their child was weighed at birth, his/her weight, and what they considered to be his/her birth size relative to other newborns. The consistency between birth size and birth weight measures was assessed, and the differences between infants with and without reported birth weights were explored. The authors conclude that maternal assessments of birth size are poor proxy indicators of birth weight. Estimates of low birth weight based on maternal assessments of birth size as very small should be recognized as underestimates of the actual prevalence of low birth weight. Moreover, infants for whom birth weights are missing should not be considered similar to those for whom weight was reported. Those without reported birth weights are more likely to be low birth weight. Thus, relying solely on reports of numeric birth weight will underestimate the prevalence of low birth weight.