Skip to main content

Table 1 Comparison of abortion incidence estimation methodologies

From: Novel approaches to estimating abortion incidence

  Expected direction of bias Expected magnitude of bias Relative precision Ability to capture self-induced abortions known only to woman Potential to yield contextual information Key data sources
Methods reviewed in this paper
 Abortion incidence complications method Unknown Unknown Moderate Only if led to PAC From PAC facilities and knowledgeable informants Health facility survey, survey of knowledgeable informants
 Direct questioning Underestimation Very high Very low Yes From women who admit to having an abortion Population-based survey of women
 List experiment Underestimation Low Low Yes No Population-based survey of women
 Confidante method Underestimation Moderate High No Limited Population-based survey of women
 CM with visibility factor Unknown Low High Yes Limited Population-based survey of women
 Modified AICM Unknown Unknown Low /moderate Yes From PAC facilities and women who admit their abortions Health facility survey, population-based survey of women
Other methods
 Preceding birth technique Underestimation High Low Yes From women who admit to having an abortion Suvey of antenational clinic patients
 Sealed envelope Underestimation Inconsistent Low Yes No Population-based survey of women
 Randomized response technique Unknown Unknown Low Yes No Population-based survey of women
 Residual method Unknown Unknown Very low Yes No Secondary data
 Best friend approach Underestimation Low/moderate Moderate No Limited Population-based survey of women
 Sealed envelope Underestimation Moderate Very high No Limited Population-based survey of women
 Network scale-up Unknown Unknown Very high Yes No Population-based survey of women