Abstract

ObjectiveResearchers traditionally rely on participant self-report for contraceptive use. We hypothesized that self-reported contraceptive use by clinical research participants may disagree with objectively measured hormonal status. Study designWe enrolled women in Harare, Zimbabwe, aged 18–34, who by self-report had not used hormonal or intrauterine contraception for >30 days, or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate for >10 months, into a study designed to assess biologic changes with contraceptive initiation and use. Blood samples obtained at enrollment and each follow-up visit (N=1630 from 447 participants) were evaluated by mass spectrometry for exogenous hormones. We individually interviewed a subset of participants (n=20) with discrepant self-reported and measured serum hormones to better understand nondisclosure of contraceptive use. ResultsDiscrepant with self-reported nonuse of hormonal contraception, synthetic progestogens were detectable in 120/447 (27%, 95% confidence interval 23%–31%) enrolled women. Measured exogenous hormones consistent with use of contraceptive pills (n=102), injectables (n=20) and implants (n=3) were detected at enrollment, with 7 women likely using >1 contraceptive. In-depth interviews revealed that participants understood the requirement to be hormone free at enrollment (100%). Most (85%) cited partner noncooperation with condoms/withdrawal and/or pregnancy concerns as major reasons for nondisclosed contraceptive use. All interviewed women (100%) cited access to health care as a primary motivation for study participation. Of participants who accurately reported nonuse of hormonal contraception at enrollment, 41/327 (12.5%) had objective evidence of nonstudy progestin use at follow-up that disagreed with self-reported nonuse. ConclusionsWomen joining contraceptive research studies may misrepresent their use of nonstudy contraceptive hormones at baseline and follow-up. Objective measures of hormone use are needed to ensure that study population exposures are accurately categorized. Implications statementAmong Zimbabwean women participating in a contraceptive research study, 27% had objective evidence of use of nonstudy contraceptives at enrollment that disagreed with self-report. Studies that rely on self-report to identify contraceptive hormone exposure could suffer from significant misclassification.

Highlights

  • Clinical research investigators traditionally rely on participant self-report for important variables including last menstrual period (LMP) and contraceptive use

  • Overall, enrolled participants who accurately reported compared to misreported contraceptive use at enrollment did not differ on any demographic or sexual behavioral feature (Table 1) except that a greater proportion of women misreporting hormonal status at enrollment reported oral contraceptive pill use at screening compared to evaluable enrollees (79.2% vs. 66.4%, p=.01)

  • We found frequent discrepancies between self-reported and measured serum contraceptive hormone use

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Clinical research investigators traditionally rely on participant self-report for important variables including last menstrual period (LMP) and contraceptive use. Research to validate self-reported contraceptive use is limited [20]. Studies assessing use of hormonal contraception and HIV acquisition risk show mixed outcome data [19]. In order to untangle possible biological links between hormonal status and risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV, there is a need to understand if self-reported variables are adequate for cohort assignment. We hypothesized that self-reported contraceptive use by clinical research participants may disagree with objectively measured hormonal status. In order to assess accuracy of self-reported LMP and contraceptive use, we compared laboratory evaluation of serum progestogens and estrogens to participant self-report. We explored reasons for misreporting in a subset of participants with discrepant self-reported and measured serum hormone data

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call