You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Detecting Induced Abortions from Reports of Pregnancy Terminations in DHS Calendar Data
Robert J. Magnani, Naomi Rutenberg and H. Gilman McCann
Studies in Family Planning
Vol. 27, No. 1 (Jan. - Feb., 1996), pp. 36-43
Published by: Population Council
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2138076
Page Count: 8
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Pregnancy, Induced abortion, Abortion, Health surveys, Classification methods, Birth control, Estimation methods, Statistical estimation, Family planning, Gender equality
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
This study considers whether pregnancy terminations reported in Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) calendar data can be classified accurately as having been spontaneous or induced based upon other information collected in the survey interview. A classification scheme is proposed that is an adaptation of the method developed by the World Health Organization for categorizing cases in which women admitted to hospitals experienced complications of pregnancy termination. The scheme is evaluated using data from the 1993 Turkey DHS. Evaluation results indicate that the method identifies true cases of induced abortion accurately, but tends to classify a relatively large number of reported spontaneous terminations as induced abortions. However, when it is corrected for likely respondent misreporting of induced abortions as spontaneous terminations, both the sensitivity and specificity of the method appear to be acceptable.
Studies in Family Planning © 1996 Population Council