Involving men and boys in family planning: A systematic review of the effective components and characteristics of complex interventions in low‐ and middle‐income countries

Áine Aventin, Martin Robinson, Jennifer Hanratty, Ciara Keenan, Jayne Hamilton, Eimear Ruane McAteer, Mark Tomlinson, Mike Clarke, Friday Okonofua, Chris Bonell and Maria Lohan

Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2023, vol. 19, issue 1

Abstract: Background Involving men and boys as both users and supporters of Family Planning (FP) is now considered essential for optimising maternal and child health outcomes. Evidence on how to engage men and boys to meet FP needs is therefore important. Objectives The main objective of this review was to assess the strength of evidence in the area and uncover the effective components and critical process‐ and system‐level characteristics of successful interventions. Search Methods We searched nine electronic databases, seven grey literature databases, organisational websites, and the reference lists of systematic reviews relating to FP. To identify process evaluations and qualitative papers associated with the included experimental studies, we used Connected Papers and hand searches of reference lists. Selection Criteria Experimental and quasi‐experimental studies of behavioural and service‐level interventions involving males aged 10 years or over in low‐ and middle‐income countries to increase uptake of FP methods were included in this review. Data Collection and Analysis Methodology was a causal chain analysis involving the development and testing of a logic model of intervention components based on stakeholder consultation and prior research. Qualitative and quantitative data relating to the evaluation studies and interventions were extracted based on the principles of ‘effectiveness‐plus’ reviews. Quantitative analysis was undertaken using r with robust variance estimation (RVE), meta‐analysis and meta‐regression. Qualitative analysis involved ‘best fit’ framework synthesis. Results We identified 8885 potentially relevant records and included 127 in the review. Fifty‐nine (46%) of these were randomised trials, the remainder were quasi‐experimental studies with a comparison group. Fifty‐four percent of the included studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias. A meta‐analysis of 72 studies (k = 265) showed that the included group of interventions had statistically significantly higher odds of improving contraceptive use when compared to comparison groups (odds ratio = 1.38, confidence interval = 1.21 to 1.57, prediction interval = 0.36 to 5.31, p

Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1296

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:camsys:v:19:y:2023:i:1:n:e1296

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Campbell Systematic Reviews from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().