Back

High-Resolution District Level Contraceptive Prevalence in Pakistan Using a Bayesian Small Area Estimation Approach

Ibrahim, M.; Naz, O.; Javeed, A.; Irum, A.; Khan, A.; Khan, A. A.

2026-02-28 public and global health
10.64898/2026.02.25.26347119 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionNational surveys in Pakistan are typically representative only at national or provincial levels, leaving large uncertainties in district-level contraceptive prevalence. This obscures local heterogeneity and limits data-driven program planning. Administrative data, although more frequent and detailed, are often underused due to reporting and measurement challenges. This study develops a multi-source small area estimation (SAE) framework to generate district-level estimates of contraceptive prevalence rate (CPR) and modern contraceptive prevalence rate (mCPR) using routine commodities data. MethodsA two-stage Bayesian SAE model was constructed to integrate survey, supply, and census data. In Stage 1, contraceptive dispensation data from the Contraceptive Logistics Management Information System (cLMIS) were converted into inferred users, normalized to married women of reproductive age (MWRA) from the 2023 Census, and scaled to provincial CPR benchmarks from the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey (PSLM). In Stage 2, a bivariate hierarchical Bayesian model jointly estimated CPR and mCPR, accounting for measurement error and borrowing statistical strength from socioeconomic and demographic covariates. Convergence and model stability were assessed through standard diagnostics (R-hat, ESS, BFMI, divergence checks). ResultsDistrict-level estimates were produced for 121 districts. CPR ranged from 9% to 46% and mCPR from 6% to 35%. Aggregated provincial estimates were consistent with PSLM benchmarks (within {+/-} 0.6 percentage points). Comparison with published district studies showed mean absolute deviations around 4 percentage points. ConclusionThe Bayesian SAE framework generates statistically coherent, high-resolution contraceptive prevalence estimates, substantially improving visibility into geographic inequities in Pakistans family planning landscape. These granular metrics offer policymakers an actionable basis for prioritizing underserved districts and tailoring context-sensitive interventions.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
22.5%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
3
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.4%
4
Journal of Global Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.7%
5
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.6%
6
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
10
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.1%
11
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.9%
12
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
13
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
14
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
15
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
16
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.5%
18
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
19
Epidemics
104 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
20
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
21
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
22
BMC Research Notes
29 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
23
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
24
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
25
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
28
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%