4.2 Article

Prevalence and distribution of unintended pregnancy: the Understanding Fertility Management in Australia National Survey

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1753-6405.12461

Keywords

unintended pregnancy; Australia; prevention

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [LP100200432]
  2. Family Planning Victoria
  3. Melbourne IVF
  4. Royal Women's Hospital
  5. Victorian Government Department of Health
  6. Australian Research Council [LP100200432] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Mistimed, unexpected or unwanted pregnancies occur in Australia, despite widespread contraception use. The objective was to estimate prevalence and ascertain modifiable social factors for prevention of unintended pregnancy. Methods: National population-based survey of women and men aged 18-51 years recruited from a random sample of electors on the Australian Electoral Roll in 2013. Data were weighted to reduce non-response bias. Factors associated with unintended pregnancy were identified in multivariable analyses. Results: Data from 2,235 completed questionnaires were analysed (Women: 69%; Men: 31%). Of those ever pregnant or partner in pregnancy (59%), 40% had experienced an unintended pregnancy. Adjusting for other risks, ever having experienced sexual coercion (AOR, 95% CI=Women 1.948; 1.458-2.601; Men 1.657, 1.014-2.708); socioeconomic disadvantage (AOR, 95% CI=Women 1.808, 1.373, 2.381; Men 1.360, 1.004-1.841), living in a rural area (AOR, 95% CI=Women 1.403, 1.056-1.864; Men 1.583, 1.161-2.159), and for men being born overseas (AOR, 95% CI 1.989, 1.317-3.002) were significantly associated with unintended pregnancy. Conclusions: Experiences of sexual coercion, social disadvantage, rural residence and overseas birth are independently associated with unintended pregnancy in Australia. Implications: Public health policy and health service initiatives should prioritise prevention of sexual coercion, reduction of social inequality and reduction of geographic inequality for those in rural areas.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available