Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2008 Mar-Apr;123(2):147-54.
doi: 10.1177/003335490812300207.

Comparability of contraceptive prevalence etimates for women from the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

John Santelli  1 , Laura Duberstein Lindberg, Lawrence B Finer, Vaughn I Rickert, Diana Bensyl, Sam Posner, Shelly Makleff, Kathryn Kost, Susheela Singh
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparability of contraceptive prevalence etimates for women from the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

John Santelli et al. Public Health Rep. 2008 Mar-Apr.

Erratum in

  • Public Health Rep. 2010 May-Jun;125(3):371

Abstract

Objective: This article assesses the comparability of contraceptive use estimates for adult women obtained from the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), using the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) as a benchmark. The 2002 BRFSS uses data collection methods that are considerably different from the NSFG.

Method: We compared demographic differences and national estimates of current contraceptive methods being used and reasons for nonuse. Variables were recoded in the BRFSS and NSFG systems to make the two samples comparable.

Results: Women in the NSFG and BRFSS were similar in age and race/ethnicity. Compared with the NSFG, the BRFSS sample was more educated and of higher income, less likely to be cohabiting, and more likely to be married. After adjusting for differences in the coding of hysterectomy, many BRFSS estimates for current contraceptive use were statistically similar to those from the NSFG. Small but statistically significant differences were found for vasectomy (7.7% and 6.3%), the pill (21.9% and 19.6%), rhythm (1.5% and 1.0%), the diaphragm (0.5% and 0.2%), and withdrawal (0.3% and 2.7%) for the BRFSS and NSFG, respectively. Major reasons for nonuse were similar: seeking pregnancy and currently pregnant. The percentage of women who were not currently sexually active was higher in the BRFSS (16.0%) compared with the NSFG (12.5%).

Conclusions: The BRFSS is a useful source of population-based data on contraceptive use for reproductive health program planning; however, planners should be cognizant that lower-income women are not fully represented in telephone surveys.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Description of sampling and data collection for the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and 2002 National Survey of Family Growth
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Bensyl DM, Iuliano DA, Carter M, Santelli J, Gilbert BC. Contraceptive use—United States and territories, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2002. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2005;54(6):1–72. - PubMed
    1. Chandra A, Martinez GM, Mosher WD, Abma JC, Jones J. Fertility, family planning, and reproductive health of U.S. women: data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth. Vital Health Stat. 2005;23(25):1–160. - PubMed
    1. Groves RM, Benson G, Mosher WD, Rosenbaum J, Granda P, Axinn W, et al. Plan and operation of Cycle 6 of the National Survey of Family Growth. Vital Health Stat. 2005;1(42):1–86. - PubMed
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US). Overview: BRFSS 2002. 2003. [cited 2006 Feb 20]. Available from: URL: http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/technical_infodata/surveydata/2002/overview_02.rtf.
    1. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis KE, Groves RM, van Hoewyk J, Willem J. National Survey of Family Growth, Cycle 6: sample design, weighting, imputation, and variance estimation. Vital Health Stat. 2006;2(142):1–82. - PubMed

Publication types