Can you offer potential reasoning why the PMA data indicating a minimal drop in contraceptive use among young women reconciles with the literature indicating increased rates of adolescent pregnancy and child, early, and forced marriage or union (CEFMU), as offered by the other presenters? Do these PMA findings align with other national/global data collection findings?
Ms. Packer: The denominator for the PMA indicator was women at risk of unintended pregnancy. This is defined as non-pregnant, non-infertile, married, or partnered women who did not want to have a child in the next year. Fewer adolescents aged 15–19 would fit this definition. We had similar findings to a recent FP2030 report. This data showed higher than expected contraceptive use in four countries and a slight decrease in two countries but overall not much change. Guttmacher data from March 2020 to December 2020 showed very little decline in adolescent contraceptive use. For Uganda, it actually increased from pre-pandemic levels. Available data are still limited, but consistently indicate that the disruptions have had less impact on SRH than initially expected. But it still may be too soon to see these impacts reflected in the data, so we have to wait a bit longer and review other data sources to understand the impact.