Cognitive and Psychosocial Accessibility to Modern Contraception: Subscales Validation  

作　　者：Lonkila Moussa Zan Clémentine Rossier Lonkila Moussa Zan;Clémentine Rossier(ISSP, Université Joseph KI-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso;IDESO, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland)

机构地区：[1]ISSP, Université Joseph KI-ZERBO, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso [2]IDESO, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

出　　处：《Health》2023年第7期746-757,共12页健康（英文）

摘　　要：While studies have examined physical access to services, cognitive and psychosocial barriers to contraceptive use have received less attention, despite their impact on access. Research shows that fours main dimensions exist under the broad concept of cognitive and psychosocial access. This study aims to validate the construction of these dimensions and measure the relation between them and their links with modern contraceptive use. We utilized a questionnaire module to collect 15 questions measuring these dimensions through the 6^th round of the Performance monitoring and accountability 2020 (PMA2020) survey in Burkina in 2019. We employed the scale validation technique to choose appropriate measures (observable indicators or items) for constructing each latent dimension (unobservable) in our study. The items consisted of questions that utilized a 5-point Likert scale or dichotomous responses to capture various psychosocial aspects. To assess the validity, reliability, convergence, and divergence of the latent dimensions and items, we utilized the validscale command in Stata. The validation process confirmed the reliability of all the dimensions. Contraceptive approval is more aligned with birth spacing rather than birth limiting, reflecting prevailing social perceptions. Women’s contraceptive agency was found to be more associated with their ability to discuss and negotiate with their partners rather than independent decision-making. Correlations between dimensions were generally weak, but the levels of knowledge, agency, and approval of contraception are positively correlated with contraceptive use and intention to use. Giving women more decision-making power and providing information to address side-effect concerns can enhance contraceptive approval.While studies have examined physical access to services, cognitive and psychosocial barriers to contraceptive use have received less attention, despite their impact on access. Research shows that fours main dimensions exist under the broad concept of cognitive and psychosocial access. This study aims to validate the construction of these dimensions and measure the relation between them and their links with modern contraceptive use. We utilized a questionnaire module to collect 15 questions measuring these dimensions through the 6^th round of the Performance monitoring and accountability 2020 (PMA2020) survey in Burkina in 2019. We employed the scale validation technique to choose appropriate measures (observable indicators or items) for constructing each latent dimension (unobservable) in our study. The items consisted of questions that utilized a 5-point Likert scale or dichotomous responses to capture various psychosocial aspects. To assess the validity, reliability, convergence, and divergence of the latent dimensions and items, we utilized the validscale command in Stata. The validation process confirmed the reliability of all the dimensions. Contraceptive approval is more aligned with birth spacing rather than birth limiting, reflecting prevailing social perceptions. Women’s contraceptive agency was found to be more associated with their ability to discuss and negotiate with their partners rather than independent decision-making. Correlations between dimensions were generally weak, but the levels of knowledge, agency, and approval of contraception are positively correlated with contraceptive use and intention to use. Giving women more decision-making power and providing information to address side-effect concerns can enhance contraceptive approval.

关 键 词：Cognitive Dimensions Psychosocial Dimensions CONTRACEPTION Intention to Use Side Effects 

分 类 号：G63[文化科学—教育学]