Dataset Information

Are self-reported fertility preferences biased? Evidence from indirect elicitation methods.

ABSTRACT: Desired fertility measures are routinely collected and used by researchers and policy makers, but their self-reported nature raises the possibility of reporting bias. In this paper, we test for the presence of such bias by comparing responses to direct survey questions with indirect questions offering a varying, randomized, degree of confidentiality to respondents in a socioeconomically diverse sample of Nigerian women ([Formula: see text]). We find that women report higher fertility preferences when asked indirectly, but only when their responses afford them complete confidentiality, not when their responses are simply blind to the enumerator. Our results suggest that there may be fewer unintended pregnancies than currently thought and that the effectiveness of family planning policy targeting may be weakened by the bias we uncover. We conclude with suggestions for future work on how to mitigate reporting bias.

SUBMITTER: Valente C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11348086 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Are self-reported fertility preferences biased? Evidence from indirect elicitation methods.

Valente Christine C Toh Wen Qiang WQ Jalingo Inuwa I Lépine Aurélia A de Paula Áureo Á Miller Grant G

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20240813 34

Desired fertility measures are routinely collected and used by researchers and policy makers, but their self-reported nature raises the possibility of reporting bias. In this paper, we test for the presence of such bias by comparing responses to direct survey questions with indirect questions offering a varying, randomized, degree of confidentiality to respondents in a socioeconomically diverse sample of Nigerian women ([Formula: see text]). We find that women report higher fertility preferences ...[more]

PMID: 39136983

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMore than 2 months have passed since the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) first emerged in Wuhan, China. With the migration of people, the epidemic has rapidly spread within China and throughout the world. Due to the severity of the epidemic, undiscovered transmission of COVID-19 deserves further investigation. The aim of our study hypothesized possible modes of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and how the virus may have spread between two family clusters within a residential building in Guangzhou, China.MethodsIn a cross-sectional study, we monitored and traced confirmed patients and their close contacts from January 11 to February 5, 2020 in Guangzhou, China, including 2 family cluster cases and 61 residents within one residential building. The environmental samples of the building and the throat swabs from the patients and from their related individuals were collected for SARS-CoV-2 and tested with real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). The relevant information was collected and reported using big data tools.ResultsThere were two notable family cluster cases in Guangzhou, which included 3 confirmed patients (family No.1: patient A, B, C) and 2 confirmed patients (family No.2: patient D, E), respectively. None of patients had contact with other confirmed patients before the onset of symptoms, and only patient A and patient B made a short stop in Wuhan by train. Home environment inspection results showed that the door handle of family No.1 was positive of SARS-CoV-2. The close contacts of the 5 patients all tested negative of SARS-CoV-2 and in good health, and therefore were released after the official medical observation period of 14-days. Finally, according to the traceability investigation through applying big data analysis, we found an epidemiological association between family No.1 and family No.2, in which patient D (family No.2) was infected through touching an elevator button contaminated by snot with virus from patient A (family No.1) on the same day.ConclusionsContaminants with virus from confirmed patients can pollute the environment of public places, and the virus can survive on the surface of objects for a short period of time. Therefore, in addition to the conventional droplet transmission, there is also indirect contact transmission such as snot-oral transmission that plays a crucial role in community spread of the virus.

Project description:BackgroundInfertility history may have important implications for clinical practice and scientific discovery. Previous research on the validity of self-reported infertility measurements has been limited in scope and duration (< 5 years). In this study, we validated self-reported infertility history measures 15-23 years after fertility treatment initiation among women who utilized assisted reproductive technology (ART).MethodsWomen who received ART treatments from three Boston infertility clinics and who enrolled in a prior study (1994-2003) were re-contacted in 2018 for the AfteR Treatment Follow-up Study (ART-FS). Infertility history was collected from clinical records and two self-report questionnaires (at ART initiation and at ART-FS enrollment). Treatment history included specific details (fresh or frozen embryo transfers, number of cycles) and treatment recall prior to ART initiation. Self-reported infertility diagnoses included polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), endometriosis, uterine factor infertility, tubal factor infertility, diminished ovarian reserve/advanced maternal age, male factor infertility, and other/unknown. We compared self-reported measures from 2018 to self-reported and clinical data from prior study initiation, using Cohen's kappa, sensitivity, specificity, and 95% confidence intervals.ResultsOf 2644 women we attempted to recontact, 808 completed the ART-FS, with an average follow-up of 19.6 years (standard deviation: 2.7). Recall of fertility treatment usage had moderate sensitivity (IVF = 0.85, Clomiphene/Gonadotropin = 0.81) but low specificity across different infertility treatment modalities (IVF = 0.63, Clomiphene/Gonadotropin = 0.55). Specific IVF details had low to moderate validity and reliability with clinical records. Reliability of recalled infertility diagnosis was higher when compared to self-report at ART initiation (PCOS K = 0.66, Endometriosis K = 0.76, Tubal K = 0.73) than when compared to clinical records (PCOS K = 0.31, Endometriosis K = 0.48, Tubal K = 0.62) and varied by diagnosis.ConclusionsThe ability of women to recall specific IVF treatment details was moderately accurate and recall of self-reported infertility diagnosis varied by diagnosis and measurement method.

Project description:PurposeDetailed cancer treatment information is important to fertility and pregnancy care of female young adult cancer survivors. Accuracy of self-report of treatments that impact fertility and pregnancy is unknown. This study assessed agreement between self-report and medical records on receipt of fertility-threatening treatments.MethodsA national cohort study of female young adult cancer survivors reported cancer treatments via Web-based questionnaires. Primary cancer treatment records were abstracted. Self-reported exposure to fertility-threatening therapies (alkylating chemotherapy, stem cell transplant, pelvic radiation, hysterectomy, and/or oophorectomy) was compared to medical records. Logistic regression models estimated odds ratios (OR) for characteristics associated with inaccurate self-report of fertility-threatening therapies.ResultsThe study included 101 survivors (mean age 28.2, SD 6.3). Lymphoma (33%), breast cancer (26%), and gynecologic cancers (10%) were the most common cancers. Accuracy of self-report was 68% for alkylating chemotherapy and 92-97% for radiation, surgery, and transplant. Significant proportions of survivors who were treated with transplant (8/13, 62%), alkylating chemotherapy (18/43, 42%), pelvic radiation (4/13, 31%), or hysterectomy and/or oophorectomy (3/13, 23%) did not report undergoing these therapies. In adjusted analysis, age ≤ 25 at diagnosis (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.3-8.7) and recurrence (OR 6.0, 95% CI 1.5-24.4) were related to inaccurate self-report.ConclusionsFemale young adult cancer survivors have limited recall of fertility-threatening cancer treatment exposures. Reproductive health providers and researchers who need this information may require primary medical records or treatment summaries.Implications for cancer survivorsAdditional patient education regarding treatment-related reproductive risks is needed to facilitate patient engagement in survivorship. Obtaining a cancer treatment summary will help survivors communicate their prior treatment exposures to reproductive healthcare providers.

Dataset Information

Are self-reported fertility preferences biased? Evidence from indirect elicitation methods.

Publications

Are self-reported fertility preferences biased? Evidence from indirect elicitation methods.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets