Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018
Female Sterilization and Cognitive Disability in the United States, 2011-2015.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Henan, Mitra Monika, Wu Justine P, Parish Susan L, Valentine Anne, Dembo Robert S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare female sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities.
METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2015, which surveyed individuals aged 15-44 years in the U.S. civilian population. Disability status (self-reported) was ascertained using a standard set of questions about hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living difficulties. Regression models were used to calculate odds of female sterilization, hysterectomies, and age of sterilization while accounting for sociodemographic differences.
RESULTS: Female sterilization rates were higher among females with cognitive (22.1% [n=272]) and noncognitive disabilities (24.7% [n=150]) than among those without disabilities (14.8% [n=1,132]). After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, females with cognitive disabilities had significantly higher odds of female sterilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98, P<.01) and hysterectomy (adjusted OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.56, P<.001) than those without cognitive disabilities. Females with cognitive disabilities also underwent sterilization at significantly younger ages (27.3 years, 95% CI 27.0-27.6) than those with noncognitive disabilities (28.3 years, 95% CI 27.9-28.8) and those without any disability (29.8 years, 95% CI 29.5-30.0).
CONCLUSION: U.S. females with cognitive disabilities were more likely to have undergone female sterilizations and hysterectomies and at younger ages than those with other disabilities or without disabilities. Drivers of these disability-related differences in female sterilization patterns must be explored.
METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2015, which surveyed individuals aged 15-44 years in the U.S. civilian population. Disability status (self-reported) was ascertained using a standard set of questions about hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living difficulties. Regression models were used to calculate odds of female sterilization, hysterectomies, and age of sterilization while accounting for sociodemographic differences.
RESULTS: Female sterilization rates were higher among females with cognitive (22.1% [n=272]) and noncognitive disabilities (24.7% [n=150]) than among those without disabilities (14.8% [n=1,132]). After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, females with cognitive disabilities had significantly higher odds of female sterilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98, P<.01) and hysterectomy (adjusted OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.56, P<.001) than those without cognitive disabilities. Females with cognitive disabilities also underwent sterilization at significantly younger ages (27.3 years, 95% CI 27.0-27.6) than those with noncognitive disabilities (28.3 years, 95% CI 27.9-28.8) and those without any disability (29.8 years, 95% CI 29.5-30.0).
CONCLUSION: U.S. females with cognitive disabilities were more likely to have undergone female sterilizations and hysterectomies and at younger ages than those with other disabilities or without disabilities. Drivers of these disability-related differences in female sterilization patterns must be explored.