Article Critique Review

Review of the article Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007–2009

Research Question

What are the trends of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods- implant and IUD-and to what extent have they replaced less-effective short-term method and permanent sterilization?

Primary Empirical Sources

Primary empirical sources include books and articles that represent the original works of an author, and the authors describe the process of data collection (Polit and Beck, 2008).  The reason for identifying the articles below as primary empirical sources is because they uses the original works of the author and includes sections for methods and results. They include:

• Determinants of and disparities in reproductive health service use among adolescent and young adult women in the United States, 2002-2008.
• Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.
• The checkered history and bright future of intrauterine contraception in the United States.
• Unintended pregnancy among U.S. adolescents: accounting for sexual activity; 
• Cost Effectiveness of Contraceptives in the United States.”
• “Unintended pregnancy in the United States: Incidence and disparities, 2006”
• Cost Effectiveness of Contraceptives in the United States

Primary Sources

This represents theoretical articles and books where the author presents the theory as their own. Examples of primary sources in the article include:

• Unintended pregnancy among U.S. adolescents: accounting for sexual activity.
• ACOG practice bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynaecologists. Number 59, January 2005. Intrauterine device.
• ACOG Practice Bulletin no. 109: Cervical cytology screening.

Secondary Empirical Sources

The article has used some secondary sources that describe the work of others. Examples of secondary sources are:

• Family planning worldwide 2008 data sheet
• The World Contraceptive use 2011 
• Pre-pregnancy Contraceptive Use Among Teens with Unintended Pregnancies Resulting in Live Births — Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), 2004–2008

How Current are the References?

Majority of the articles are current with nine of them being between 2010 and 2013. However, the articles have some out-dated references with six between 2005 and 2009 and two below 2005. The years that would be current for this study are from 2010 to 2013. 

Identification of Relevance Studies

Although the study has used relevant studies, the authors failed to identify the relevance of the used articles. However, the relevant studies can be determined by checking on Google scholar and Web science tool.

Description of Relevance Theories

One theory that has been described by the study is that LARC methods substitute the permanent sterilization and less-effective short-acting methods. However, the results of the study, illustrated that use of LARC methods substitutes the use of less-effective short-acting methods. Nevertheless,   LARC use does not substitute permanent sterilization.

Another theory is that majority of women prefers family planning methods that do not rely on repeated and frequent clinic visits. The article describes this by comparing short-acting methods like condoms and pills with LARC methods. Studies illustrates that the effectiveness of IUD together with its importance has facilitated its use. This has increased the number of women preferring these methods from 2.4% in 2002 to 5.6% in 2006-2008 (Finer, Jerman, & Kavanaugh, 2012). 

Relevant Landmark

The article uses some relevant studies. Some of the studies that I identified as landmark relevance include:

• Pre-pregnancy Contraceptive Use Among Teens with Unintended Pregnancies Resulting in Live Births — Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), 2004–2008
• Determinants of and disparities in reproductive health service use among adolescent and young adult women in the United States, 2002-2008

According to Dickersin, Scherer, Lefebvre (1994), a relevant landmark articles in a paper are identified if, their frequency of identification and appears at the start of a chapter. I also used web of science and Google scholar to identify if the frequently used articles are relevant landmarks. The two tools assisted in selecting the two articles as relevant landmarks in the study. 

Critique of Relevance Studies

In contrary with many scholarly articles and journals, this study has not critiqued the relevance articles used. This is an illustration of inadequate research or there was no knowledge gap. 

Paraphrased Statements

The article has paraphrased most of its references to promote the flow of the presented content.  Some of the paraphrased sentences in the article include:

• “Use of long-acting contraception increased from 2.4% of all method use in 2002 to 5.6% in 2006–08 (12).”
• The unintended pregnancy rate of 52 per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 2006 is high compared to many other industrialized countries, and about half of all pregnancies are unplanned (1).
• Additionally, ACOG’s revised recommendations for less frequent Pap smear screenings (8), coupled with adolescents’ and young adults’ declining use of reproductive health services (9), suggest the need for methods that do not rely on frequent or repeat visits to a health care provider to ensure better reproductive health outcomes.

Description of Current Research Knowledge

The current research knowledge has been properly described. This is because majority of articles used were less than three years old. The article used nine references between 2010 and 2012. However, there are some discrepancies between the age of the articles used and the conclusion delivered from the data. For example, majority of articles in referenced are between 2010 and 2012. However, the conclusion delivered from the whole study is from 2006-2008. Therefore, the authors failed to utilize the modern articles to build on the trend and knowledge on the literature review. 

Literature Review Knowledge Gap

The literature review in the research article has identified a gap in the knowledge base which provided the base of this study. The authors used statements to describe the knowledge data that facilitated this study. 

• “Use of long-acting contraception increased from 2.4% of all method use in 2002 to 5.6% in 2006–08 (12). Still, LARC use remains relatively low among contraceptive users, and these methods may be particularly underutilized by young women.” (Finer, Jerman, & Kavanaugh, 2012)
• “In this report, we analyse newly available data to see if this pattern has continued and to identify groups where the change has been the most prominent, and look at whether LARC is taking the place of sterilization or less-effective methods.” (Finer, Jerman, & Kavanaugh, 2012)

Presentation of Literature Review

The authors used a logical and clearly organized literature review.  For example, the authors started the literature review by identifying the current situation of American women. They included the statistics of unplanned pregnancies and the age that they highly occur. This was followed by examining the use of LARC method in comparison with other family planning methods and its importance. Lastly, the researchers identified the gap and the reason for undertaking the study. The study is also concisely written. 

Use of Literature Review in Building a Case for the Study

In a systematic way, the authors have used literature review to build the case of this study. They used articles from 1999 to 2012 to explain the trend of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods -implant and IUD- use. The literature review also added knowledge on how the LARC methods have replaced less-effective short-acting method and permanent sterilization. 

Reference

Dickersin, K., Scherer, R., & Lefebvre, C. (1994). Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 309(6964), 1286.

Finer, L., Jerman, J., & Kavanaugh, M. (2012). Changes in use of long-acting contraceptive methods in the United States, 2007–2009. Fertility And Sterility, 98(4), 893-897. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.027

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2008). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.