Advertisement

Maternal and Child Health Journal

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 197–201 | Cite as

Pregnancy Intention: How PRAMS Data Can Inform Programs and Policy

  • Cathy L. Melvin
  • Mary Rogers
  • Brenda Colley Gilbert
  • Leslie Lipscomb
  • Richard Lorenz
  • Steven Ronck
  • Sherilynn Casey
Article

Abstract

Background: In most states, the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) is the only source for state-specific, population-based data on the prevalence of unintended pregnancy among women having a live birth. These data can be used in a variety of ways to inform state policies and programs aimed at the prevention of unintended pregnancy. Objectives: This paper highlights the programmatic and policy development activities undertaken by three states in relation to unintended pregnancy as well as the role that PRAMS data played in those efforts. Results: Georgia, Oklahoma, and Washington have used PRAMS data to gain support for program initiatives directed at unintended pregnancy, to promote policies aimed at either monitoring or reducing unintended pregnancy, and to acquire additional funds for related programs, such as family planning.

PRAMS unintended pregnancy policy program data family planning 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Henshaw SK. Unintended pregnancy in the United States. Fam Plann Perspect 1998:30(1);4–26, 46.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Public Health and Science. Healthy People 2010 objectives: Draft for public comment. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adams MM, Shulman HB, Bruce C, Hogue C, Brogan D, PRAMS Working Group. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System: Design, questionnaire, data collection and response rates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1991;5:333–46.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colley Gilbert B, Shulman HB, Fischer LA, Rogers MM. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS): Methods and 1996 response rates from 11 states. Matern Child Health J 1999;3(4):199–209.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Colley Gilbert BJ, Johnson C, Morrow B, Gaffield M, Ahluwalia I, PRAMS Working Group. Prevalence of selected maternal and infant characteristics, Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS), 1997. MMWR 1999;48:SS–5.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health, Family Health Branch, Office of Adolescent Health and Development. Fact sheet: Office of Adolescent Health and Youth Development. Atlanta: Georgia Department of Human Resources, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hopkins RS, Marshall H, Hoecherl S. Medicaid costs of live births from unintended pregnancies in Florida. J Fla Med Assoc 1995:82;540–3.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Committee on Unintended Pregnancy, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences. The best intentions: Unintended pregnancy and the well-being of children and families. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1995.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cathy L. Melvin
    • 1
  • Mary Rogers
    • 2
  • Brenda Colley Gilbert
    • 2
  • Leslie Lipscomb
    • 2
  • Richard Lorenz
    • 3
  • Steven Ronck
    • 3
  • Sherilynn Casey
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Reproductive HealthCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAtlanta
  2. 2.Division of Reproductive HealthCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAtlanta
  3. 3.Oklahoma State Department of HealthOklahoma City
  4. 4.Washington State Department of HealthOlympia

Personalised recommendations