An Application of the List Experiment to Estimate Abortion Prevalence in Karachi, Pakistan.

CONTEXT Abortion is particularly difficult to measure, especially in legally restrictive settings such as Pakistan. The List Experiment-a technique for measuring sensitive health behaviors indirectly-may minimize respondents' underreporting of abortion due to stigma or legal restrictions, but has not been previously applied to estimate abortion prevalence in Pakistan. METHODS A sample of 4,159 married women of reproductive age were recruited from two communities of Karachi in 2018. Participants completed a survey that included a double list experiment to measure lifetime abortion prevalence, as well as direct questions about abortion and other background characteristics. Data were used to calculate direct and indirect estimates of abortion prevalence for the overall sample and by sociodemographic characteristics, as well as to test for a design effect. Regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between characteristics and abortion reporting from direct questioning and the list experiment. RESULTS The estimate of abortion prevalence from the list experiment was 16%; the estimate from the direct question was 8%. No evidence of a design effect was found. Abortion reporting was associated with most selected characteristics in the regression model for direct questioning, but with few in the list experiment models. CONCLUSIONS That the estimate of abortion prevalence in Karachi generated from the list experiment was twice that generated from direct questioning suggests that the indirect method reduced underreporting, and may have utility to estimate abortion in similar settings and to improve the accuracy of data collecting for other sensitive health topics.

[1]  E. Nakua,et al.  Estimating the incidence of abortion: a comparison of five approaches in Ghana , 2020, BMJ Global Health.

[2]  D. Grossman,et al.  Reducing underreporting of stigmatized pregnancy outcomes: results from a mixed-methods study of self-managed abortion in Texas using the list-experiment method , 2019, BMC Women's Health.

[3]  Susheela Singh,et al.  Estimating Abortion Incidence: Assessment of a Widely Used Indirect Method , 2019, Population Research and Policy Review.

[4]  Susheela Singh,et al.  Estimating Abortion Incidence: Assessment of a Widely Used Indirect Method , 2019, Population Research and Policy Review.

[5]  D. Bishai,et al.  Can a List Experiment Improve Validity of Abortion Measurement? , 2019, Studies in family planning.

[6]  A. Fotouhi,et al.  Prevalence of Induced Abortion in Iran: A Comparison of Two Indirect Estimation Techniques. , 2018, International perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[7]  Richard J. K. Taylor,et al.  Under-estimation of maternal and perinatal mortality revealed by an enhanced surveillance system: enumerating all births and deaths in Pakistan , 2018, BMC Public Health.

[8]  E. Vittinghoff,et al.  Multivariable regression analysis of list experiment data on abortion: results from a large, randomly-selected population based study in Liberia , 2017, Population Health Metrics.

[9]  H. Moseson,et al.  The List Experiment for Measuring Abortion: What We Know and What We Need. , 2017, Studies in family planning.

[10]  J. Potter,et al.  Measuring Texas women’s experiences with abortion self-induction using a list experiment , 2017 .

[11]  Z. Mumtaz,et al.  Abortion and fertility control in Pakistan: the role of misoprostol , 2017, Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care.

[12]  Lawrence L. Wu,et al.  Alternative Estimates of Lifetime Prevalence Of Abortion from Indirect Survey Questioning Methods. , 2016, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[13]  E. Vittinghoff,et al.  Reducing under-reporting of stigmatized health events using the List Experiment: results from a randomized, population-based study of abortion in Liberia. , 2015, International journal of epidemiology.

[14]  Susheela Singh,et al.  Induced abortions and unintended pregnancies in pakistan. , 2014, Studies in family planning.

[15]  Ayesha Khan Induced abortion in Pakistan: community-based research. , 2013, JPMA. The Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association.

[16]  Diana Foster,et al.  Attitudes and decision making among women seeking abortions at one U.S. clinic. , 2012, Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health.

[17]  C. Tanton,et al.  Assessing the Validity of Sexual Behaviour Reports in a Whole Population Survey in Rural Malawi , 2011, Sexually Transmitted Infections.

[18]  Kosuke Imai,et al.  Multivariate Regression Analysis for the Item Count Technique , 2011 .

[19]  Ben Jann,et al.  Sensitive Questions in Online Surveys: Experimental Results for the Randomized Response Technique (RRT) and the Unmatched Count Technique (UCT) , 2011 .

[20]  Razia Mustafa Abbassi,et al.  Morbidity and mortality due to unsafe abortion in Pakistan , 2010, International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics.

[21]  Jon A. Krosnick,et al.  Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports Tests using the item count technique , 2010 .

[22]  Kerstin E. E. Schroder,et al.  Methodological challenges in research on sexual risk behavior: II. Accuracy of self-reports , 2003, Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.

[23]  S. Bhutta,et al.  Surgical Complications following Unsafe Abortion , 2003 .

[24]  R. Jagannathan Relying on surveys to understand abortion behavior: some cautionary evidence. , 2001, American journal of public health.

[25]  B. Silver,et al.  The validity of survey responses on abortion: Evidence from Estonia , 1994, Demography.

[26]  G. Mair Annual Meeting of the Population Association , 1949 .

[27]  Kosuke Imai,et al.  Statistical Analysis of List Experiments , 2012, Political Analysis.

[28]  Susheela Singh,et al.  Methodologies for estimating abortion incidence and abortion-related morbidity: a review. , 2010 .

[29]  R. Horvath,et al.  International Union for the Scientific Study of Population , 1973 .