Editing my post as I may have come across too critical. Very supportive of this work and just trying to give helpful feedback.
Paula Amato
Karma: 165
Thanks. In reviewing the survey methodology more carefully, I see the data comes from cross-sectional survey over 3 months at yearly time points Therefore impossible to say when during the year the increased use began. But as Nick and the post clearly state, if this was the only major intervention during 2021, it’s reasonable to assume that at least some of the increase was due to the FEM campaign.
Fair enough. Was going mostly from what I’ve read in their post and on their website in addition to the RP report. I don’t disagree. Although, some international organizations partnering with local public health departments in LMICs have a decent track record in this regard.
Right, my question is how can you infer causality from the data?
“intervention period indicated by shaded area”?
To be clear, I’m a gynecologist. I think increasing contraceptive use is extremely important and impactful and that mass media campaigns are likely to be effective. However, I find some of the claims in this narrative very misleading. I encourage the FEM team to engage in more rigorous research and to focus on capacity-building perhaps by partnering with other organizations that have a great deal of experience working in this space over a long period of time.
Thanks for the link. So the PMA survey shows a significant increase in modern contraceptive prevalence rate starting in Feb ’21 - a full 7 months BEFORE the start of the FEM radio campaign—without any appreciable change on slope of the increase after the beginning of the FEM campaign (shaded area on the graph). How are you attributing ANY increase directly due to the FEM campaign itself? And any thoughts about what led to the increased rate preceding the start of the campaign?
Exciting work! Where can I find details about the survey—methodology and results? What contraception methods were most commonly used and how was use assessed? What was the continuation rate? Was there any impact on unplanned pregnancy rate?
Doctors also have the ability to contribute to health policy in various contexts which can impact many, many more people in addition to those they impact with direct care.
Doctors also have the ability to contribute to health policy in various contexts which can impact many, many more people in addition to those they impact with direct care.
Thanks for posting. Appreciate the response and analysis. Would love to see efforts to increase women attendance and participation at EAG and in EA in general. Also curious about the age breakdown of EAG applicants vs attendees.
Would love more demographic data on who applied and who was admitted (in aggregate) if you’re willing to share.
Consider hiring an outside firm to do an independent review.
Eli, has CEA looked at their admission rates according to age and gender? Are you willing to share this data? It would be interesting to see if there is any systemic bias in the admissions process.
Does EAG publish statistics on admission rates? Is there an age and/or gender bias?
Hi Everyone, I’m a reproductive endocrinologist and Professor of OB/GYN at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, OR. My research focuses on innovative assisted reproductive technologies for the treatment of age-related infertility/ovarian aging and prevention of heritable genetic diseases (germline gene therapy). I am most interested in reproductive ethics. Looking forward to learning from you all. Thanks, Elika!
Is there a way to get automatically notified regarding a new post?
Thank you for writing this! As someone interested in exploring opportunities in biosecurity, I found it very helpful.