Can Family Planning Service Statistics Be Used to Track Population-Level Outcomes?
Open Access
- 21 February 2018
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Johns Hopkins School Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Communication Programs in Global Health: Science and Practice
- Vol. 6 (1), 93-102
- https://doi.org/10.9745/ghsp-d-17-00341
Abstract
The need for annual family planning program tracking data under the Family Planning 2020 (FP2020) initiative has contributed to renewed interest in family planning service statistics as a potential data source for annual estimates of the modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR). We sought to assess (1) how well a set of commonly recorded data elements in routine service statistics systems could, with some fairly simple adjustments, track key population-level outcome indicators, and (2) whether some data elements performed better than others. We used data from 22 countries in Africa and Asia to analyze 3 data elements collected from service statistics: (1) number of contraceptive commodities distributed to clients, (2) number of family planning service visits, and (3) number of current contraceptive users. Data quality was assessed via analysis of mean square errors, using the United Nations Population Division World Contraceptive Use annual mCPR estimates as the “gold standard.” We also examined the magnitude of several components of measurement error: (1) variance, (2) level bias, and (3) slope (or trend) bias. Our results indicate modest levels of tracking error for data on commodities to clients (7%) and service visits (10%), and somewhat higher error rates for data on current users (19%). Variance and slope bias were relatively small for all data elements. Level bias was by far the largest contributor to tracking error. Paired comparisons of data elements in countries that collected at least 2 of the 3 data elements indicated a modest advantage of data on commodities to clients. None of the data elements considered was sufficiently accurate to be used to produce reliable stand-alone annual estimates of mCPR. However, the relatively low levels of variance and slope bias indicate that trends calculated from these 3 data elements can be productively used in conjunction with the Family Planning Estimation Tool (FPET) currently used to produce annual mCPR tracking estimates for FP2020.This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- National, regional, and global rates and trends in contraceptive prevalence and unmet need for family planning between 1990 and 2015: a systematic and comprehensive analysisThe Lancet, 2013
- Estimating the contribution of a service delivery organisation to the national modern contraceptive prevalence rate: Marie Stopes International's Impact 2 modelBMC Public Health, 2013
- PRISM framework: a paradigm shift for designing, strengthening and evaluating routine health information systemsHealth Policy and Planning, 2009
- Health information systems: the foundations of public health.2005