Back

Experiences of contraceptive use and contraceptive counseling among German psychology students: a cross-sectional online survey

Lindig, A.; Seiwert, J.

2025-08-05 sexual and reproductive health
10.1101/2025.08.01.25332712 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundIn recent years, hormonal contraceptive use has declined in Germany, yet little is known about the contraceptive needs and preferences of its population. This study addresses this gap by (1) identifying attitudes, subjective knowledge, and information needs of psychology students regarding contraceptive methods, (2) evaluating person-centeredness (PC) and shared decision-making (SDM) in contraceptive counseling, and (3) comparing users of hormonal and non-hormonal methods regarding attitudes, knowledge, and age. MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted via an online survey among psychology students in Germany who were biologically capable of becoming pregnant. PC in counseling was assessed using the Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling Scale (PCCC), while SDM was measured using the CollaboRATE questionnaire and Control Preference Scale. Attitudes, knowledge, and information needs were evaluated through adapted or self-developed items. The PCCC was translated and adapted using a team translation protocol (TRAPD). ResultsOf 126 participants, 82.6% used at least one contraceptive method, mainly condoms (43.8%) and the combined pill (19.8%). Hormonal users were younger (M=22.84) than non-hormonal users (M=25.40). Attitudes toward hormonal contraception were generally negative. Participants reported good or basic knowledge of 9 out of 15 methods; non-hormonal users knew more methods than hormonal users. Gynecologists (36.7%) were the most frequent information source. About 35.7% had received contraceptive counseling in the previous year but reported low satisfaction with the information provided. Overall, PC and SDM were only partially implemented in contraceptive counseling. ConclusionFindings highlight the need for more person-centered counseling to support informed decisions. The results can inform interventions aimed at improving contraceptive knowledge among users and enhancing PC and SDM practices among gynecologists.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.