Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 1792678

Does choice make a difference to contraceptive use? Evidence from east Java.

Abstract

This study investigates sustained use of contraceptives among women in East Java, Indonesia. Interest is focused on the effect of whether the client's choice of contraceptive method was granted or denied, and the interaction between whether choice was granted or denied and husband-wife concurrence concerning method choice. Data were collected twice in a panel survey. The first round was conducted in family planning clinics among women initiating contraceptive use; the second was a follow-up household survey carried out 12 months later. Whether the user was granted her choice of method was found to be a very important determinant of sustained use of contraceptives. The interaction between whether choice was granted and whether there was husband-wife concurrence on method choice was also important. The highest rate of discontinuation occurred when method choice was denied in the presence of husband-wife agreement on method choice, and the lowest rate occurred when method choice was granted in the presence of such concurrence. The results imply that contraceptive continuation can be enhanced either when family planning workers pay more attention to the stated desires of their clients, or when policy is instituted allowing clients to use their method of choice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Pariani, D M Heer, M D Van Arsdol. Does choice make a difference to contraceptive use? Evidence from east Java.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1792678/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

A compensation election for binary social choice.

We report experimental results examining the properties of a bidding mechanism, the "Compensation Election," which is designed to implement a simple binary choice between two options. We may think of the group decision problem as a choice between a new rule and the status quo. The rule and the status quo are each common outcomes that apply across all individuals, but the value or cost that they induce on each individual differs according to each individual's circumstances: some gain, some lose, and others are unaffected by a change to the new from the old. Rather than casting votes, each subject submits a bid reflecting his willingness to pay to induce the group to select one option and the amount he wishes to be paid if the alternative option is selected. The Compensation Election chooses the option that receives the highest sum of bids. We find that, although the Compensation Election allows subjects to strategically bid above their value (or even for the option they do not prefer), such behavior is not the norm. We also find that subjects' bids more truthfully reveal their values when there are more bidders in the election.

Choice Behavior↗

The effects of expanding patient choice of provider on waiting times: evidence from a policy experiment.

Long waiting times for inpatient treatment in the UK National Health Service have been a source of popular and political concern, and therefore a target for policy initiatives. In the London Patient Choice Project, patients at risk of breaching inpatient waiting time targets were offered the choice of an alternative hospital with a guaranteed shorter wait. This paper develops a simple theoretical model of the effect of greater patient choice on waiting times. It then uses a difference in difference econometric methodology to estimate the impact of the London choice project on ophthalmology waiting times. In line with the model predictions, the project led to shorter average waiting times in the London region and a convergence in waiting times amongst London hospitals.

Choice Behavior↗