Number 86 n November 10, 2015

Current Contraceptive Use and Variation by
 

Selected Characteristics Among Women Aged 15–44:
 

United States, 2011–2013
 by Kimberly Daniels, Ph.D.; Jill Daugherty, Ph.D.; Jo Jones, Ph.D.; and William Mosher, Ph.D.,

Division of Vital Statistics

Abstract

Objective—This report describes current contraceptive use among women of

childbearing age (ages 15–44) during 2011–2013. Current contraceptive use is

defined as use during the month of interview, not for a specific act of sexual

intercourse. This report’s primary focus is describing patterns of contraceptive

use among women who are currently using contraception, by social and

demographic characteristics. Data from 2002 and 2006–2010 are presented for

comparison.

Methods—Data for the 2011–2013 National Survey of Family Growth

(NSFG) were collected through in-person interviews in respondents’ homes.

The 2011–2013 NSFG, a nationally representative survey conducted by the

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health

Statistics, was based on interviews with 10,416 women and men aged 15–44 in

the U.S. household population. This report is based on the sample of 5,601

women interviewed in 2011–2013, with a response rate of 73.4%.

Results—Among women currently using contraception, the most commonly

used methods were the pill (25.9%, or 9.7 million women), female sterilization

(25.1%, or 9.4 million women), the male condom (15.3%, or 5.8 million

women), and long-acting reversible contraception (LARC)—intrauterine devices

or contraceptive implants (11.6%, or 4.4 million women). Differences in method

use were seen across social and demographic characteristics. Comparisons

between time points reveal some differences, such as higher use of LARC in

2011–2013 compared with earlier time points.

Keywords: pill • condom • long-acting reversible contraception • National

Survey of Family Growth

Introduction

The National Survey of Family

Growth (NSFG) is designed to provide

national data that supplement and

complement National Vital Statistics

System data on registered births in the

United States, by collecting data on the

factors affecting those rates—including

sexual activity, marriage, divorce,

cohabitation, contraceptive use, and

infertility (1). The Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention’s (CDC)

National Center for Health Statistics

(NCHS) coordinates both of these data

collection efforts. NSFG data are

analyzed, in part, to understand recent

changes and group differences in birth

and pregnancy rates as documented in

recent National Vital Statistics

Reports (2) and CDC Vital Signs (3).

Use of contraception and the

effectiveness of the method used to

prevent pregnancy are major factors

affecting pregnancy, birth rates, and the

ability of women and their partners to

plan their pregnancies and avoid

unintended pregnancies. In 1999, family

planning, defined as ‘‘the ability to

achieve desired birth spacing and family

size,’’ was noted as 1 of 10

‘‘achievements in public health’’ of the

20th century because of its contributions

to the health of infants, children, and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 

National Center for Health Statistics 
Page 2 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

women (4). Reducing the percentage of

pregnancies that are unintended has

been one of the national Healthy People

health promotion objectives since they

were first established in 1980 (5–7).

Although virtually all sexually

experienced women in the United States

have used contraception at some time in

their lives (8,9), women and their

partners may not always use

contraception consistently or correctly

when trying to avoid a pregnancy (10,11).

Additionally, the chance that a woman

will have an unintended pregnancy can

vary by which method she or her

partner uses (12–14). For example, the

probability of a contraceptive failure

(pregnancy) within the first 12 months

of typical use of the male condom is

18% compared with 9% for the oral

contraceptive pill, 0.8% for the copper

intrauterine device (IUD), 0.2% for the

levonorgestrel IUD, and 0.05% for the

contraceptive implant, Implanon (13).

Notably, in recent years considerable

attention has been given to a subset of

reversible contraceptive methods known

as long-acting reversible contraception

(LARC) that includes contraceptive

implants and IUDs, given their relatively

low failure rates and potential to reduce

unintended pregnancies compared with

other reversible contraceptive methods

such as the oral contraceptive pill (14–

18). Although they do not provide

protection against sexually transmitted

infections, LARC methods require little

or no user action once inserted (14).

Given the increased attention to LARC,

this report highlights the use of these

methods. Another recently released

NCHS report using NSFG data focuses

on trends in the use of LARC (19). A

recent CDC Vital Signs report describes

trends in the use of LARC among

teenagers seeking contraceptive services

at Title X service sites (20).

Data on contraceptive use can

increase understanding of differences in

birth and pregnancy rates, as well as

fertility timing, unintended pregnancies,

and marital and nonmarital fertility

(relationship context of fertility). In

addition to examining overall fertility

trends and patterns, a large body of

research focuses on describing and

explaining differences in fertility across

social and demographic characteristics.

Differences across both Hispanic origin

and race and educational attainment

have been of particular interest to

fertility researchers (21–23). For

example, looking at the relationship

context of fertility, the percentage of

births that were nonmarital in the 5

years before the 2011–2013 NSFG was

43.9% overall—60.7% for Hispanic,

29.8% for non-Hispanic white, and

74.3% for non-Hispanic black women

(analysis not shown). These percentages

are similar to those based on the

2006–2010 NSFG (24). Looking at

unintended births across educational

attainment finds that in the 5 years

before the 2006–2010 NSFG,

37%–41% of births to women aged

22–44 who had not completed high

school, had a high school diploma or

General Educational Development

(GED) high school equivalency

diploma, or had completed some

college were unintended, compared

with 17% of births to women with a

bachelor’s degree or higher (25).

Objectives

This report describes contraceptive

use among women currently using

contraception in the United States.

Current contraceptive use is defined as

use during the month of interview, not

for a specific act of sexual intercourse.

A previous report using 2011–2013

NSFG data described use of

contraception among all women (26).

This report further describes

contraceptive use by selected

characteristics that are associated with

contraceptive use and method

choice (27). The characteristics shown in

this report include selected demographic

and life course variables (age, Hispanic

origin and race, education, marital or

cohabiting status, parity, and intentions

for future births) and variables related to

health care access (poverty-level

income, current insurance status, and

residential location). These measures are

described in detail, including the specific

NSFG variable names, in the ‘‘Definition

of terms’’ in Technical Notes.

Methods

Data source

This report is based primarily on

the 2011–2013 NSFG, augmented by

data from the 2002 and 2006–2010

NSFG to show comparisons over the

past decade. NSFG is jointly planned

and funded by NCHS and several other

programs of the U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services (see

Acknowledgments).

The 2011–2013 NSFG is based on a

national probability sample of 10,416

women and men aged 15–44 (5,601

women and 4,815 men) in the U.S.

household population. Interviewing

occurred continuously from September

2011 through September 2013. The

sample is designed to produce national,

not state or local, estimates. People

living on military bases or in institutions

were not included in the survey. The

fieldwork plan, interview content, and

other survey procedures are similar to

those used in previous surveys (1,28).

NSFG data from 4,815 men interviewed

during 2011–2013 are not analyzed in

this report because no equivalent

measure of current contraceptive status

for men is available.

The NSFG interview was voluntary;

all participants were provided

information about the survey before

being asked for consent, with signed

consent required for minors aged 15–17.

The survey protocol was reviewed and

approved by the NCHS Research Ethics

Review Board. To further protect the

respondent’s privacy, only one person

was interviewed in each selected

household. The interviews were

conducted in person by female

interviewers. Responses were entered

directly into laptop computers. The

response rate in 2011–2013 was 72.8%

overall—73.4% for women and 72.1%

for men.

The interviews of women collected

information on pregnancies and births,

marriages and cohabitations, sterilization

operations, contraceptive use, infertility,

use of medical care related to birth

control, prenatal care, and social and

demographic characteristics. The
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015	 Page 3

interview asked about contraceptive use

in depth, as described in the next

section.

The first two tables in this report

describe contraceptive use at a broad

level for three time periods: 2011–2013,

2006–2010, and 2002; method use and

nonuse among all women aged 15–44;

and method type among women

currently using contraception. The

subsequent three tables provide a greater

level of detail on contraceptive use and

show method type by selected social

and demographic characteristics.

Because a greater level of detail is

presented in these tables, only two time

periods, 2011–2013 and 2002, are

shown. This allows comparison of

2011–2013 data with information from a

decade earlier, in 2002.

In the 2002 NSFG, 7,643 women

were interviewed. In 2006–2010, 12,279

women were interviewed. Each survey

was a national sample, representative of

the 60 million to 62 million women

aged 15–44 in the U.S. household

population, and questions on contraceptive use across these surveys were

similar (29).

Measurement of

contraceptive use

Measuring contraceptive use

during vaginal intercourse is one of the

central purposes of NSFG, because

contraception is a key factor affecting

birth and pregnancy rates and family

formation.

Questions on contraception in the

interviews of women include:

+	 Whether she or a male sexual partner

has ever used each of 22

contraceptive methods at any time in

her life (ever use) (8,9,30).

+	 Whether she has stopped using a

method because of dissatisfaction

with the method, and the reasons for

the dissatisfaction (method

discontinuation) (8,9,30).

+	 Whether she or her partner used any

methods the first time she had

intercourse with a male (use at first

sexual intercourse) (9,31).

+	 What method or methods she used

during the month of the interview,

and detail about methods used during

each month for up to 4 years before

the interview (current contraceptive

status and recent use) (27,30).

These questions allow for multiple

ways of describing contraceptive use,

including ever use in a woman’s lifetime

as shown in previous reports, and

current use during the month of

interview (8,9,27,30). This report

focuses on current use of contraception

during the month of interview, using the

CONSTAT1 recode.

Table 1 describes current

contraceptive status among all women

and includes information about nonuse

for such reasons as pregnancy seeking

or nonsurgical sterility. Tables 2–5 are

based on the subset of women who are

currently using contraception. These

tables describe the types of methods

used and variation across time and

characteristics such as education,

Hispanic origin and race, income, and

parity. The specific contraceptive

methods discussed in this report are

defined and described in many other

sources, including some for health care

professionals (14) and others for

patients.

Measuring current use when

two or more methods are

used

In this report, women who were

currently using more than one method in

the month of interview are classified by

the method that was most effective in

preventing pregnancy, because that

method has the greatest impact on their

risk of unintended pregnancy. For

example, women who report using both

birth control pills and male condoms in

the current month are classified as using

birth control pills, because pills are

more effective at preventing a

pregnancy. Ranking of contraceptive

methods is based on extensive clinical

and population-based research showing

the failure rate for each method as it is

‘‘typically used’’ (13). More information

on the current contraceptive status

measure is provided in the ‘‘Definition

of terms’’ in Technical Notes. For

2011–2013, 10.7% of women were

currently using more than one

contraceptive method during the same

month (analysis not shown), similar to

earlier findings (8.6% of women in

2006–2010) (27).

Statistical analysis

Statistics for this report were

produced using SAS software, version

9.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.). The

SAS SURVEY procedures are able to

handle the complex sample design used

by NSFG to produce accurate standard

errors. All estimates in this report were

weighted to reflect the reproductiveaged female household population of the

United States at the approximate

midpoint of 2011–2013 interviewing.

U.S. Census Bureau estimates were used

to adjust the weights to the July 2012

U.S. population. Given the sample

design of the 2011–2013 NSFG and the

smaller number of women in this 2-year

data file, the sampling errors of some

statistics are larger than those produced

for the 2002 and 2006–2010 NSFG.

Because of the comparatively smaller

sample size, some detailed comparisons

shown previously are not shown here.

For example, nativity status for Hispanic

women and some categories of race and

education were too small to show

separately.

When percentages between groups

were compared, significance was

determined by using two-tailed t tests at

the 5% level. No adjustments were

made for multiple comparisons. Terms

such as ‘‘greater than’’ and ‘‘less than’’

indicate that a statistically significant

difference was found. Terms such as

‘‘similar’’ or ‘‘no difference’’ indicate

that the statistics being compared were

not significantly different. Lack of

comment regarding the difference

between any two statistics does not

mean that the difference was tested and

found not to be significant. The data

presented in this report are bivariate

associations that may be explained by

other factors not controlled for in the

tables or included in the report.

Statements describing an increase or

decrease between two time points do not

necessarily indicate a linear trend.
 

ata, NHSR 86,
 

“Current Contraceptive Use and Variation by Selected Characteristics Among Women Aged 15–44: United States,
 

2011–2013.”
 

Figure 1. Percent distribution of women aged 15–44 who are currently using

contraception, by type of contraceptive method used: United States, 2011–2013

Page 4	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

In this report, as in other NSFG

reports, percentages are not shown if the

sample denominator is fewer than 100

cases or if the numerator is fewer than

5 cases. When a percentage or other

statistic is not shown for this reason, the

table contains an asterisk (*) signifying

that the ‘‘statistic does not meet

standards of reliability or precision.’’

For most statistics presented in this

report, the numerators and denominators

are much larger.

Results

Current contraceptive status

Table 1 shows current contraceptive

use and nonuse for all women for the

2002, 2006–2010, and 2011–2013

NSFG. Those who are using

contraception are shown by the

contraceptive method being used; those

who are not using contraception are

shown by the reason for their nonuse.

The estimates shown in Table 1 have

been published previously (26) but are

included to provide context for the

remainder of this report.

For 2002, 2006–2010, and 2011–

2013, about 6 in 10 (62%) women were

using contraception. For 2011–2013, the

oral contraceptive pill (16.0%), female

sterilization (15.5%), and the male

condom (9.4%) remained the most

commonly used methods.

+	 The percentage of all women aged

15–44 using LARC increased from

3.8% to 7.2% between 2006–2010

and 2011–2013.

+	 Use of most other methods was

similar between 2006–2010 and

2011–2013.

+	 In all NSFG survey years shown,

about 5% of women of reproductive

age were currently pregnant or

postpartum at the time of interview,

and about 4% were seeking

pregnancy, for a total of about 9% of

women.

+	 For all survey years shown, about

19% of women were not currently

using contraception because they

either did not have sexual intercourse

in the 3 months before the interview

or had never had sexual intercourse.

Trends and subgroup

differences in patterns of

contraceptive use

The remaining Tables 2–5 and all

figures show current contraceptive use

among the 62% of women currently

using contraception in Table 1 (referred

to as ‘‘current contraceptors’’ or

‘‘current users’’). This allows for

comparisons of method use among only

those women who are using a method.

Trends over time

Table 2 shows contraceptive use by

type of method among women currently

using contraception for 2002, 2006–

2010, and 2011–2013. Figure 1

illustrates the percent distribution of

contraceptive use by type of method

shown in Table 2 for 2011–2013.

+ The pill and female sterilization

remain the leading methods among

women using contraception. For

2011–2013, about 26% of current

contraceptors are using the pill, and

about 25% are relying on female

sterilization, accounting for one-half

of all current contraceptive use.

+	 Following the pill and female

sterilization, most women and their

partners relied on the male condom

(15.3% for 2011–2013).

+	 Current use of LARC has increased

through the years, with 11.6% of

women currently using contraception

reporting use of a LARC method

(10.3% using an IUD and 1.3% using

an implant) during 2011–2013

compared with 6.0% for 2006–2010

and 2.4% in 2002.

Trends and patterns by

social and demographic

characteristics

Table 3 shows method use among

current contraceptors aged 15–44, by

age, Hispanic origin and race, and

education for 2002 and 2011–2013. The

data for education are shown for women

aged 22–44, because the majority of

women aged 15–21 were attending

school at the time of interview and have

not yet completed their education (75%

of women aged 15–21 for 2011–2013,
Bachelor’s 

diploma or GED diploma or GED bachelor’s degree degree or 

higher 

No high school High school Some college, no

50
 

45
 

40
 

35
 

31.9 

30
 

25
 22.7 

20
 

15
 12.7 

10.1

10 

5.4 5.6

5 3.2 

0.6 

0 

Pill1	 Injectable 

1

Significant linear trend.
 

NOTE: GED is General Educational Development high school equivalency diploma.
 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2011–2013, and Table 3 data, NHSR 86,
 

“Current Contraceptive Use and Variation by Selected Characteristics Among Women Aged 15–44: United States,
 

2011–2013.”
 

Figure 2. Percentage of contracepting women aged 22–44 who are using the pill or an

injectable contraceptive method, by education: United States, 2011–2013 Percent 

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015	 Page 5

analysis not shown). Method use varies

significantly by age, Hispanic origin and

race, and education.

+	 Method use by age was similar

between 2002 and 2011–2013. The

most commonly used methods among

current contraceptors aged 15–24

were the pill (47.3% for 2011–2013)

and the condom (21.4% for 2011–

2013). Together, these two methods

account for about 7 in 10 current

contraceptors aged 15–24 at both

time points. At ages 35–44, about 6

in 10 current contraceptors were

relying on their own or their partner’s

sterilization. During 2011–2013,

44.2% of women aged 35–44 using

contraception were using female

sterilization, and 17.9% were relying

on their partner’s sterilization.

+	 Looking across Hispanic origin and

race, similar percentages of currently

contracepting Hispanic (15.1%) and

non-Hispanic white women (11.4%)

are using LARC. Use is lower for

non-Hispanic black women (8.6%)

compared with Hispanic women. The

difference in LARC use between

non-Hispanic black women (8.6%)

and non-Hispanic white women

(11.4%) is not statistically significant.

In 2002, LARC use was higher for

Hispanic women compared with

women of all other Hispanic-origin

and race groups shown.

+ As in 2002, a higher percentage of

women with more education relied on

their partner’s vasectomy during

2011–2013 (for example, 14.9% of

current users with a bachelor’s degree

or higher compared with 7.8% of

women with a high school diploma or

GED for 2011–2013).

+ Differences also were seen across

education for use of the pill and

injectables (Figure 2). Use of the pill

is higher among women with more

education, whereas use of an

injectable is higher among women

with lower levels of education. This

is seen at both time points.

+	 Use of LARC is similar across

education categories shown at both

time points—for example, around

11%–14% for 2011–2013.

Table 4 presents data on type of

method used among women currently

using contraception across marital or

cohabiting status, parity, and intentions

for future births for 2002 and 2011–

2013.

+	 Looking at variation across marital or

cohabiting status in 2011–2013,

43.5% of never-married current

contraceptors were currently using the

pill compared with 26.1% of

currently cohabiting women, 17.9%

of currently married women, and

11.5% of formerly married women.

About 1 in 7 women who were

currently cohabiting (13.5%),

currently married (12.8%), or

formerly married, not cohabiting

(14.5%) were using a LARC method

(Figure 3).

+	 At both time points, current

contraceptive users with more

children were more likely to be using

surgical sterilization (for example,

56.7% of women with three or more

births compared with 9.8% of women

with one birth in 2011–2013 were

surgically sterile). Notably, during

2011–2013 approximately 1 in 6

women with one (17.4%) or two

births (16.3%) was using a LARC

method.

+	 A higher percentage of women who

intend no future births were using

nonreversible methods of birth

control such as female and male

sterilization than those who intend

future births. This was seen at both

time points.

+	 Women who intend future births were

more likely to be using the male

condom (23.5% for 2011–2013)

compared with women who do not

intend to have any additional births

(9.3% for 2011–2013). Women who

intend future births were also more

likely to be using the pill than those

who do not intend to have more

children (43.8% compared with

12.8% for 2011–2013). These

differences were seen for 2002 and

2011–2013.
Currently Currently Formerly married, Never 

married cohabiting not cohabiting married 

50
 

45
 43.5 

40
 

35
 

30
 

26.1 

25
 

20
 17.9 

14.5 15 13.5 12.8 11.5 

10 7.6 

5 

0 

Long-acting 

reversible contraception2 

1

Significantly different across marital status (p < 0.05).
 2

Significant difference for currently married and currently cohabiting women compared with never-married women
 

(p < 0.05). Category includes intrauterine devices and implants.
 

SOURCES: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2011–2013, and Table 4 data, NHSR 86,
 

“Current Contraceptive Use and Variation by Selected Characteristics Among Women Aged 15–44: United States,
 

2011–2013.”
 

Figure 3. Percentage of contracepting women aged 15–44 who are using the pill or a

long-acting reversible contraception, by current marital status: United States, 2011–2013

Pill1 

Percent 

Page 6	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

Table 5 shows type of method used

among current contraceptors, by

poverty-level income, current health

insurance status, and place of residence.

The data for poverty-level income and

current health insurance status are

shown for women aged 20–44 because

reporting is less reliable for teen survey

respondents.

+	 Women with higher incomes had

higher use of the pill and lower

use of an injectable for 2002 and

2011–2013.

+	 Women who had Medicaid,

Children’s Health Insurance Program,

or a state-sponsored plan in 2011–

2013 were more likely to be using

female sterilization as a birth control

method (40.9%) than those with

private insurance (22.3%). Similar

percentages of women with each type

of insurance were using LARC, about

11%–16%.

+ The percentages for female

sterilization were similar across

residential location for 2011–2013,

about 25%. This differs from 2002,

when a higher percentage of current

contraceptors in nonmetropolitan

residential areas (37.9%) were relying

on female sterilization compared with

women in metropolitan areas (about

25%).

Discussion and

Conclusion

This report presents a snapshot of

current contraceptive status (based on

the month of interview) among women

in the peak years of childbearing,

primarily using data collected in the

2011–2013 NSFG. Contraceptive use in

the United States remains virtually

universal—99% of women who have

ever had sexual intercourse have ever

used contraception, and previous reports

show that most women have used about

three different methods in their lives (8).

However, at any given time, some

women (and their partners) are not using

contraception because they are not

sexually active or are pregnant,

postpartum, or trying to become

pregnant. Some women are surgically

sterile for noncontraceptive reasons, or

nonsurgically sterile and unable to have

children. Women and their partners also

may not be using contraception because

they are ambivalent about becoming

pregnant, have health-related or other

concerns about using contraception, or

perceive themselves to have low risk of

becoming pregnant. During 2011–2013,

about 62% of women aged 15–44 were

currently using contraception.

Contraceptive use and method

choice may change over time for

various reasons, including the

availability of new methods and larger

societal changes in fertility patterns. For

example, the average age at first birth

for women in the United States has

increased in recent decades at least

partially because of an increase in first

births to women aged 35 and over (32).

This suggests potential changes over

time in the use of contraception by age

as first births are delayed.

While the most commonly used

methods—female sterilization, the pill,

and the male condom—appear to remain

consistent over time, an increase has

been noted in the use of LARC

methods, primarily the IUD. Although

the tables in this report present bivariate

associations that may be explained by

other factors not controlled for in the

tables or included in the report,

describing variation in contraceptive use

over time and across social and

demographic characteristics is

potentially useful for understanding

changes and differences in unintended

pregnancies. Some notable differences

across social and demographic

characteristics include higher use of the

contraceptive pill among younger

women and those with higher

educational attainment and income

relative to the poverty level. Younger

women and those intending future births

have higher use of male condoms
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015	 Page 7

compared with older women and those

who do not intend any future births.

Similar percentages of women are

relying on male condoms across income

levels and types of health insurance

coverage.

This report highlights use of LARC

methods given the recent attention to

these methods and their potential to

reduce unintended pregnancies among

women using reversible contraceptive

methods. Among women currently using

contraception, use of LARC increased

from 6.0% for 2006–2010 to 11.6% for

2011–2013. Use of IUDs makes up the

bulk of this category, with 10.3% of

current contraceptors using an IUD

during 2011–2013. Of the social and

demographic characteristics described in

this report, current use of IUDs among

women currently using contraception

appears highest among women aged

25–34 and women with one or two

births. Current use of LARC methods is

similar across the education groups

presented in this report as well as health

insurance coverage. Other recent reports

also describe LARC use, including more

detail about trends over time (19,26).

Additional highly effective

reversible contraceptive methods have

become available in recent decades,

offering women (and their partners)

increased options for planning their

pregnancies and avoiding unintended

pregnancies. This report provides

updated information on the

contraceptive methods women and their

partners are using during a time period

with increased method choices. This

report also provides information that

furthers understanding of patterns and

trends seen in NCHS National Vital

Statistics Reports based on birth

certificate data. Understanding trends

over time in contraceptive use and

method choice, as well as variation

across social and demographic

characteristics, offers potential insight

into larger population patterns including

birth rates, unintended pregnancies, and

the relationship context in which

children are born.

References

1.Groves RM, Mosher WD, Lepkowski

JM, Kirgis NG. Planning and

development of the continuous

National Survey of Family Growth.

National Center for Health Statistics.

Vital Health Stat 1(48). 2009.

2.Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman

MJK, MJK, et al. Births: Final data

for 2013. National vital statistics

reports; vol 64 no 1. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health

Statistics. 2015.

3.CDC. Vital Signs: Teen pregnancy,

United States, 1991–2009. MMWR

60(13):414–20. 2011. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/

mmwrhtml/mm6013a5.htm.

4.CDC. Achievements in public health,

1900–1999: Family planning.

MMWR 48(47):1073–80. 1999.

Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/

mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/

mm4847a1.htm.

5.U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, Public Health

Service. Promoting health/preventing

disease: Objectives for the nation.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office. 1980.

6.U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. Healthy People

2000: National health promotion and

disease prevention objectives.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office. 1990.

7.U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. Healthy People

2020, 2020 topics and objectives:

Family planning. Available from:

http://www.healthypeople.gov/

2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.

aspx?topicid=13.

8.Daniels K, Mosher WD, Jones J.

Contraceptive methods women have

ever used: United States, 1982–2010.

National health statistics reports; no

62. Hyattsville, MD: National Center

for Health Statistics. 2013.

9.Chandra A, Martinez GM, Mosher

WD, Abma JC, Jones J. Fertility,

family planning, and reproductive

health of U.S. women: Data from the

2002 National Survey of Family

Growth. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 23(25).

2005.

10. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Shifts in

intended and unintended pregnancies

in the United States, 2001–2008. Am

J Public Health 104 Suppl 1:S43–8.

2014.

11. Finer LB, Zolna MR. Unintended

pregnancy in the United States:

Incidence and disparities, 2006.

Contraception 84(5):478–85. 2011.

12. Kost K, Singh S, Vaughan B,

Trussell J, Bankole A. Estimates of

contraceptive failure from the 2002

National Survey of Family Growth.

Contraception 77(1):10–21. 2008.

13. Trussell J. Contraceptive failure in

the United States. Contraception

83(5):397–404. 2011.

14. Hatcher RA, Trussell J, Nelson AL,

Cates W Jr, Stewart F, Kowal D.

Contraceptive technology, 20th ed.

New York, NY: Ardent Media. 2011.

15. Higgins JA. Celebration meets

caution: LARC’s boons, potential

busts, and the benefits of a

reproductive justice approach.

Contraception 89(4):237–41. 2014.

16. CDC. U.S. medical eligibility criteria

for contraceptive use, 2010. MMWR

Recomm Rep 59(No. RR–4):1–86.

2010.

17. Secura GM, Allsworth JE, Madden T,

Mullersman JL, Peipert JF. The

Contraceptive CHOICE Project:

Reducing barriers to long-acting

reversible contraception. Am J Obstet

Gynecol 203(2):115.e1–7. 2010.

18. Speidel JJ, Harper CC, Shields WC.

The potential of long-acting

reversible contraception to decrease

unintended pregnancy. Contraception

78(3):197–200. 2008.

19. Branum AM, Jones J. Trends in

long-acting reversible contraception

use among U.S. women aged 15–44.

NCHS data brief, no 188.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2015.

20. Romero L, Pazol K, Warner L,

Gavin L, Moskosky S, Besera G,

et al. Vital signs: Trends in use of

long-acting reversible contraception

among teens aged 15–19 years

seeking contraceptive services—

United States, 2005–2013. MMWR

64(13):363–9. 2015. Available from:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/

mmwrhtml/mm6413a6.htm?s_

cid=mm6413a6_w.
Page 8 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

21. Sweeney MM, Raley RK. Race,

ethnicity, and the changing context of

childbearing in the United States.

Annual Review of Sociology

40:539–58. 2014.

22. Mincieli L, Manlove J, McGarrett M,

Moore KA, Ryan S. The relationship

context of births outside of marriage:

The rise of cohabitation. Child

Trends Research Brief 2007–13.

2007.

23. Musick K, England P, Edgington S,

Kangas N. Education differences in

intended and unintended fertility. Soc

Forces 88(2):543–72. 2009.

24. Martinez G, Daniels K, Chandra A.

Fertility of men and women aged

15–44 years in the United States:

National Survey of Family Growth,

2006–2010. National health statistics

reports; no 51. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2012.

25. Mosher WD, Jones J, Abma JC.

Intended and unintended births in the

United States: 1982–2010. National

health statistics reports; no 55.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2012.

26. Daniels K, Daugherty J, Jones J.

Current contraceptive status among

women aged 15–44: United States,

2011–2013. NCHS data brief, no

173. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2014.

27. Jones J, Mosher W, Daniels K.

Current contraceptive use in the

United States, 2006–2010, and

changes in patterns of use since

1995. National health statistics

reports; no 60. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2012.

28. Lepkowski JM, Mosher WD, Davis

KE, et al. The 2006–2010 National

Survey of Familty Growth: Sample

design and analysis of a continuous

survey. National Center for Health

Statistics. Vital Health Stat 2(150).

2010.

29. Mosher WD, Martinez GM, Chandra

A, et al. Use of contraception and

use of family planning services in the

United States, 1982–2002. Advance

data from vital and health statistics;

no 350. Hyattsville, MD: National

Center for Health Statistics. 2004.

30. Mosher WD, Jones J. Use of

contraception in the United States:

1982–2008. National Center for

Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat

23(29). 2010.

31. Martinez GM, Chandra A, Abma JC,

et al. Fertility, contraception, and

fatherhood: Data on men and women

from Cycle 6 (2002) of the National

Survey of Family Growth. National

Center for Health Statistics. Vital

Health Stat 23(26). 2006.

32. Mathews TJ, Hamilton BE. First

births to older women continue to

rise. NCHS data brief, no 152.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for

Health Statistics. 2014.

33. Cohen RA, Makuc DM, Bernstein

AB, et al. Health insurance coverage

trends, 1959–2007: Estimates from

the National Health Interview

Survey. National health statistics

reports; no 17. Hyattsville, MD:

National Center for Health Statistics.

2009. Available from: http://

wwwdev.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/

nhsr017.pdf.

34. Office of Management and Budget.

Revisions to the standards for the

classification of federal data on race

and ethnicity. Fed Regist

62(210):58782–90. 1997. Available

from: https://www.whitehouse.gov/

omb/fedreg_1997standards/.
National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015 Page 9

Table 1. Number and percent distribution

interview: United States, 2002–2013

of women aged 15–44, by current contraceptive status and method used during month of

Characteristic 2002 2006–2010 2011–2013

All women .....................................

Total ........................................

Using contraception ...............................

Female sterilization ..............................

Male sterilization ...............................

Pill ........................................

Long-acting reversible contraception ...................

Intrauterine device ............................

Implant ...................................

Injectable (Depo-Provera)1 .........................

Contraceptive ring or patch2 ........................

Diaphragm ...................................

Condom.....................................

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ..................

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning ..............

Withdrawal ...................................

Other methods3 ................................

Not using contraception4 ............................

Surgically sterile—female (noncontraceptive) ..............

Nonsurgically sterile—female or male...................

Pregnant or postpartum ...........................

Seeking pregnancy ..............................

Other nonuse:

Never had intercourse...........................

No intercourse during 3 months before interview ..........

Had intercourse during 3 months before interview .........

61.9

16.7

5.7

19.0

1.5

1.3

0.3

3.4

0.4

0.2

11.1

0.7

0.2

2.5

0.6

38.1

1.5

1.6

5.3

4.2

10.9

7.2

7.4

61,561

100.0

(0.77)

(0.59)

(0.38)

(0.66)

(0.19)

(0.16)

(0.07)

(0.28)

(0.08)

(0.06)

(0.45)

(0.14)

(0.07)

(0.26)

(0.12)

(0.77)

(0.17)

(0.18)

(0.41)

(0.28)

(0.46)

(0.56)

(0.40)

Number (thousands)

61,755

Percent distribution (standard

100.0

62.2 (0.79)

16.5 (0.77)

6.2 (0.43)

17.1 (0.62)

3.8 (0.31)

3.5 (0.28)

0.3 (0.08)

2.4 (0.19)

1.8 (0.15)

0.1 (0.05)

10.2 (0.42)

0.6 (0.09)

0.1 (0.05)

3.2 (0.26)

0.2 (0.06)

37.8 (0.79)

0.4 (0.09)

1.7 (0.17)

5.0 (0.25)

4.0 (0.25)

11.8 (0.65)

7.3 (0.32)

7.7 (0.40)

error)

61.7

15.5

5.1

16.0

7.2

6.4

0.8

2.8

1.6

9.4

0.7

0.1

3.0

0.3

38.3

0.7

2.2

5.0

4.5

10.8

8.2

6.9

60,887

100.0

(1.10)

(1.01)

(0.50)

(0.89)

(0.53)

(0.48)

(0.16)

(0.26)

(0.28)

*

(0.57)

(0.11)

(0.06)

(0.30)

(0.11)

(1.10)

(0.15)

(0.26)

(0.45)

(0.37)

(0.78)

(0.55)

(0.35)

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.
 1In 2002 and 2006–2010, this category included Lunelle.
 2In 2002, this category did not include the contraceptive ring.
 3Includes other methods available during that time period, not shown separately above.
 4Includes all other reasons for nonuse not included below.
 

NOTES: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding. The unweighted sample size is 7,643

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2002, 2006–2010, and 2011–2013.
 

for 2002, 12,279 for 2006–2010, and 5,601 for 2011–2013.
 
Page 10 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

Table 2. Number

during month of

of women

interview:

aged 15–44 currently using

United States, 2002–2013

contraception, and percent distribution by current contraceptive method used

Characteristic 2002 2006–2010 2011–2013

All women using contraception ........................

Using contraception ...............................

Female sterilization ..............................

Male sterilization ...............................

Pill ........................................

Long-acting reversible contraception ...................

Intrauterine device ............................

Implant ....................................

Injectable (Depo-Provera)1 .........................

Contraceptive ring or patch2 ........................

Diaphragm ...................................

Condom.....................................

Periodic abstinence—calendar rhythm ..................

Periodic abstinence—natural family planning ..............

Withdrawal ...................................

Other methods3 ................................

27.0

9.2

30.6

2.4

2.0

0.4

5.5

0.6

0.3

18.0

1.2

0.3

4.0

0.9

38,109

100.0

(0.92)

(0.61)

(0.93)

(0.31)

(0.27)

(0.11)

(0.44)

(0.44)

(0.09)

(0.70)

(0.23)

(0.11)

(0.41)

(0.20)

Number (thousands)

38,394

Percent distribution (standard

100.0

26.6 (1.17)

10.0 (0.65)

27.5 (1.02)

6.0 (0.48)

5.6 (0.44)

0.5 (0.12)

3.8 (0.30)

2.9 (0.25)

0.1 (0.08)

16.3 (0.67)

1.0 (0.15)

0.2 (0.08)

5.2 (0.40)

0.4 (0.09)

error)

25.1

8.2

25.9

11.6

10.3

1.3

4.5

2.6

15.3

1.2

0.2

4.8

0.5

37,586

100.0

(1.49)

(0.76)

(1.34)

(0.87)

(0.78)

(0.26)

(0.43)

(0.45)

*

(0.96)

(0.18)

(0.09)

(0.48)

(0.18)

* Figure does not meet standards of reliability or precision.
 1In 2002 and 2006–2010, this category included Lunelle.
 2In 2002, this category did not include the contraceptive ring.
 3Includes other methods available during that time period, not shown separately above.
 

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.
 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Survey of Family Growth, 2002, 2006–2010, and 2011–2013.
 
National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 86n November 10, 2015 Page 11

4 currently using a method of contraception

United States, 2002 and 2011–2013

during month of interview, and percent distribution by method, according to age, Hispanic origin

Number

(thousands)

37,586

38,109

9,421

14,011

14,155

9,071

13,396

15,643

6,894

22,652

4,917

3,124

5,370

25,513

4,754

2,472

3,293

7,927

10,274

10,394

3,887

9,996

9,954

8,741

Using

any

method

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Sterilization

Female Male

25.1 (1.49) 8.2 (0.76)

27.0 (0.92) 9.2 (0.61)

1.6 (0.40) *

21.7 (2.30) 3.8 (0.60)

44.2 (2.34) 17.9 (2.02)

2.4 (0.46) 0.5 (0.20)

21.7 (1.26) 6.8 (0.68)

45.8 (1.62) 16.3 (1.39)

32.9 (3.12) 3.5 (1.16)

21.4 (1.95) 11.9 (1.26)

36.8 (2.71) 1.5 (0.38)

16.7 (3.38) 2.3 (1.14)

33.8 (2.48) 4.4 (0.69)

23.9 (1.19) 11.7 (0.83)

39.2 (2.05) 2.3 (0.87)

20.9 (2.88) 7.0 (2.82)

49.4 (3.92) 1.1 (0.59)

40.5 (2.85) 7.8 (1.84)

29.3 (2.11) 8.5 (1.47)

15.4 (2.22) 14.9 (1.92)

55.2 (3.24) 2.8 (1.10)

41.4 (1.58) 10.8 (0.96)

28.7 (1.71) 12.1 (1.59)

12.8 (1.43) 12.8 (1.47)

Long-acting reversible contraception

Intrauterine

Subtotal device Implant

Percent distribution (standard error)

11.6 (0.87) 10.3 (0.78) 1.3 (0.26)

2.4 (0.31) 2.0 (0.27) 0.4 (0.11)

10.5 (1.14) 7.6 (1.13) 2.9 (0.56)

16.5 (1.63) 15.1 (1.46) 1.4 (0.44)

7.6 (1.31) 7.4 (1.30) *

1.3 (0.25) 1.3 (0.24) *

4.3 (0.63) 3.4 (0.56) 0.8 (0.26)

1.5 (0.38) 1.3 (0.36) *

15.1 (2.03) 13.2 (1.84) 1.9 (0.58)

11.4 (1.17) 10.5 (1.09) 0.9 (0.26)

8.6 (1.17) 6.5 (1.21) 2.1 (0.60)

10.6 (2.58) 9.1 (2.30) 1.5 (0.50)

7.1 (1.14) 5.3 (0.89) 1.8 (0.63)

1.7 (0.30) 1.5 (0.29) 0.2 (0.08)

1.5 (0.54) 1.5 (0.53) *

2.1 (0.80) 1.5 (0.70) *

11.8 (3.12) 11.2 (3.12) *

11.6 (2.14) 10.3 (2.07) 1.3 (0.45)

13.7 (1.80) 12.1 (1.77) 1.6 (0.46)

11.3 (1.40) 11.0 (1.36) *

4.6 (1.21) 2.5 (0.64) 2.1 (0.94)

2.8 (0.62) 2.5 (0.59) 0.3 (0.17)

2.7 (0.57) 2.3 (0.54) 0.4 (0.14)

2.1 (0.46) 2.0 (0.46) *

Contraceptive

ring or

patch1

2.6 (0.45)

0.6 (0.14)

4.2 (1.11)

3.1 (0.78)

1.0 (0.44)

1.0 (0.32)

0.9 (0.32)

*

2.1 (0.52)

2.4 (0.57)

3.1 (1.45)

4.7 (1.78)

0.8 (0.38)

0.4 (0.14)

0.8 (0.36)

*

*

2.2 (1.07)

3.4 (0.94)

3.0 (0.81)

1.7 (0.87)

0.3 (0.11)

0.6 (0.25)

*

Injectable

(DepoProvera)2

4.5 (0.43)

5.5 (0.44)

8.5 (1.03)

4.8 (0.82)

1.6 (0.64)

11.7 (1.24)

5.4 (0.67)

1.9 (0.50)

4.7 (1.07)

3.1 (0.61)

10.0 (1.61)

6.0 (2.21)

7.8 (1.42)

4.3 (0.53)

9.4 (1.20)

5.1 (1.34)

10.1 (2.61)

5.6 (1.41)

3.2 (0.73)

0.6 (0.25)

7.5 (1.58)

5.2 (0.78)

3.3 (0.51)

2.1 (0.40)

Condom

15.3 (0.96)

18.0 (0.70)

21.4 (1.97)

17.1 (1.60)

9.4 (1.32)

24.4 (1.69)

18.7 (1.24)

13.6 (1.15)

15.0 (1.82)

14.2 (1.39)

16.3 (2.33)

22.0 (2.93)

18.5 (1.69)

16.6 (0.92)

19.8 (1.43)

27.7 (3.21)

15.1 (2.96)

11.8 (2.33)

12.3 (1.61)

16.5 (1.71)

13.2 (1.67)

13.1 (1.06)

17.9 (1.38)

20.8 (1.81)

Withdrawal

4.8 (0.48)

4.0 (0.41)

4.7 (0.95)

6.0 (0.87)

3.7 (0.64)

4.2 (0.73)

5.6 (0.76)

2.4 (0.59)

6.4 (1.13)

4.5 (0.63)

5.1 (1.13)

3.3 (1.07)

3.7 (0.64)

3.9 (0.52)

2.6 (0.57)

7.4 (2.68)

5.5 (1.65)

6.1 (1.14)

5.3 (0.79)

3.6 (0.76)

3.1 (0.83)

5.5 (0.90)

4.1 (0.85)

2.8 (0.55)

Other

method

2.0 (0.31)

2.7 (0.32)

1.7 (0.71)

1.9 (0.36)

2.2 (0.54)

1.9 (0.39)

2.3 (0.45)

3.5 (0.68)

1.4 (0.40)

2.1 (0.49)

1.7 (0.50)

2.4 (1.08)

1.9 (0.50)

3.1 (0.47)

1.6 (0.46)

2.6 (0.84)

*

1.7 (0.87)

1.7 (0.43)

3.0 (0.88)

1.3 (0.77)

2.0 (0.74)

2.9 (0.69)

4.5 (0.76)

25.9

30.6

47.3

25.0

12.4

52.5

34.3

14.7

19.0

29.0

17.0

32.0

22.0

34.4

22.7

25.4

5.4

12.7

22.7

31.9

10.6

19.0

27.6

41.8

Pill

(1.34)

(0.93)

(2.60)

(1.64)

(1.91)

(2.19)

(1.41)

(0.99)

(2.79)

(1.80)

(1.85)

(4.50)

(1.40)

(1.17)

(1.92)

(2.62)

(1.10)

(1.61)

(2.05)

(2.23)

(1.44)

(1.34)

(1.76)

(1.88)

sion.

ve ring.

ED is General

owth, 2002 and

Educational

2011–2013.

Development high school equivalency diploma.
Page 12 National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 86n November 10, 2015

4 currently using a method of contraception during month

o have more children: United States, 2002 and 2011–2013

of interview, and percent distribution, by method, according to marital or

Number

(thousands)

Using

any

method

Sterilization

Female Male Pill

Long-acting reversible contraception

Contraceptive

ring or

patch1

Injectable

(DepoProvera)2 Condom Withdrawal Other Subtotal method Intrauterine device Implant

17,191

6,242

3,591

10,562

20,655

4,039

3,924

9,491

12,614

6,170

9,396

9,406

11,786

6,702

10,415

9,205

15,602

21,742

14,213

23,361

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

28.8

19.2

57.9

11.5

29.8

25.4

54.9

10.0

2.1

9.8

34.4

56.7

2.0

13.0

38.2

56.4

43.4

44.0

(2.07)

(2.57)

(3.67)

(1.45)

(1.50)

(2.40)

(2.32)

(1.29)

(0.55)

(1.67)

(2.76)

(3.01)

(0.42)

(1.35)

(1.84)

(2.03)

–

(2.09)

*

(1.26)

15.7

4.4

2.2

0.3

15.4

3.1

3.3

0.9

2.0

5.6

12.8

13.6

3.1

4.7

15.5

13.2

14.1

0.2

14.9

(1.59)

(1.71)

(0.83)

(0.15)

(1.07)

(0.78)

(1.15)

(0.22)

(0.63)

(1.19)

(2.09)

(2.03)

(0.53)

(0.91)

(1.69)

(1.37)

*

(1.36)

(0.13)

(0.95)

17.9

26.1

11.5

43.5

23.6

33.2

19.1

49.4

52.2

24.3

13.0

4.4

56.8

33.0

17.9

9.8

43.8

12.8

51.4

17.7

(2.01)

(3.31)

(2.03)

(2.15)

(1.13)

(2.33)

(1.97)

(2.33)

(2.33)

(2.84)

(1.89)

(0.83)

(1.85)

(1.91)

(1.43)

(1.05)

(2.21)

(1.45)

(1.56)

(0.94)

Percent

12.8 (1.45)

13.5 (1.78)

14.5 (3.79)

7.6 (0.91)

3.1 (0.43)

2.5 (0.69)

3.1 (0.92)

0.7 (0.25)

5.9 (1.05)

17.4 (1.82)

16.3 (1.78)

10.9 (2.04)

0.6 (0.23)

2.8 (0.66)

3.9 (0.62)

3.0 (0.65)

12.8 (1.21)

10.8 (1.14)

2.8 (0.42)

2.3 (0.41)

distribution (standard error)

12.0 (1.41) 0.8 (0.23)

10.8 (1.72) 2.7 (0.73)

14.1 (3.80) 0.5 (0.24)

6.0 (0.81) 1.6 (0.39)

2.6 (0.40) 0.5 (0.18)

1.7 (0.50) *

2.9 (0.90) *

0.5 (0.23) *

4.8 (0.92) 1.1 (0.40)

14.5 (1.62) 2.9 (0.72)

15.4 (1.72) 0.9 (0.27)

10.0 (1.99) 0.9 (0.36)

0.5 (0.22) *

2.4 (0.62) 0.4 (0.18)

3.3 (0.57) 0.6 (0.30)

2.3 (0.51) 0.6 (0.28)

11.0 (1.12) 1.8 (0.45)

9.9 (1.10) 0.9 (0.23)

2.0 (0.34) 0.8 (0.26)

2.1 (0.39) 0.2 (0.10)

2.3

2.4

4.0

0.7

0.6

3.5

4.2

1.8

1.1

0.7

0.8

0.4

0.7

3.7

1.8

1.1

0.2

(0.64)

(0.99)

*

(1.06)

(0.22)

*

*

(0.26)

(0.85)

(1.35)

(0.73)

(0.69)

(0.27)

(0.35)

(0.19)

(0.31)

(0.74)

(0.55)

(0.32)

(0.05)

1.7

6.1

2.3

9.0

3.2

9.6

3.0

9.8

5.2

7.0

4.0

2.5

5.8

10.5

3.9

3.3

6.5

3.1

8.5

3.7

(0.50)

(1.53)

(0.78)

(1.22)

(0.44)

(1.60)

(0.68)

(1.07)

(0.73)

(1.62)

(1.09)

(0.91)

(0.72)

(1.26)

(0.54)

(0.59)

(0.88)

(0.59)

(0.86)

(0.45)

12.7

21.6

7.5

18.3

16.4

18.1

12.5

23.4

23.2

20.0

11.1

5.8

24.4

22.4

14.3

10.5

23.5

9.3

26.8

12.3

(1.32)

(3.15)

(1.24)

(1.82)

(0.97)

(1.97)

(1.77)

(1.40)

(1.98)

(3.24)

(1.83)

(1.09)

(1.43)

(1.54)

(1.32)

(1.39)

(1.59)

(1.19)

(1.40)

(0.76)

5.5

5.3

2.8

4.2

4.2

5.7

2.0

3.6

4.2

10.0

3.8

3.3

4.6

7.3

3.3

1.5

7.2

3.1

6.2

2.4

(0.64)

(1.46)

(0.99)

(0.69)

(0.57)

(1.27)

(0.57)

(0.75)

(0.77)

(1.67)

(0.67)

(0.72)

(0.76)

(1.13)

(0.67)

(0.55)

(0.92)

(0.41)

(0.72)

(0.37)

2.7

1.3

0.9

1.6

3.5

2.1

1.8

1.5

1.6

1.6

2.8

1.8

2.0

5.6

2.6

1.6

2.3

1.6

2.9

2.6

(0.50)

(0.49)

(0.35)

(0.60)

(0.53)

(0.59)

(0.76)

(0.36)

(0.56)

(0.55)

(0.64)

(0.69)

(0.42)

(1.36)

(0.50)

(0.48)

(0.45)

(0.40)

(0.41)

(0.47)

sion.

ve ring.

w/refuse’’ to the intent question are not shown separately.

owth, 2002 and 2011–2013.
National Health Statistics Reports

n Number 86n November 10, 2015 Page 13

4 currently using a method of contraception during month of interview and percent distribution, by method, according to poverty level

us, and place of residence: United States, 2002 and 2011–2013

Sterilization Long-acting reversible contraception

Using Contraceptive Injectable

Number any Intrauterine ring or (Depo- Other

housands) method Female Male Pill Subtotal device Implant patch1 Provera)2 Condom Withdrawal method

Percent distribution (standard error)

12,738 100.0 36.8 (2.27) 3.6 (1.08) 14.1 (1.25) 13.3 (1.48) 11.4 (1.36) 1.9 (0.36) 3.2 (0.87) 7.3 (0.95) 14.9 (1.50) 5.5 (0.83) 1.3 (0.28)

8,856 100.0 37.0 (2.51) 2.7 (1.00) 14.0 (1.39) 14.0 (1.62) 12.0 (1.54) 2.0 (0.43) 2.8 (1.02) 7.0 (1.20) 15.6 (1.98) 5.5 (1.07) 1.3 (0.38)

8,587 100.0 28.4 (2.78) 9.1 (1.59) 23.0 (2.10) 13.2 (1.87) 11.8 (1.83) 1.3 (0.56) 2.7 (0.94) 3.4 (0.76) 12.4 (1.49) 4.6 (0.83) 3.2 (0.77)

13,086 100.0 17.7 (2.06) 14.1 (1.67) 31.7 (2.42) 10.8 (1.42) 10.2 (1.32) 0.6 (0.29) 2.1 (0.64) 0.9 (0.30) 16.4 (1.92) 4.3 (0.90) 2.0 (0.70)

9,525 100.0 40.5 (2.18) 4.7 (1.12) 20.7 (1.60) 4.4 (0.70) 3.4 (0.53) 1.0 (0.38) 1.0 (0.40) 7.2 (0.99) 15.0 (1.16) 3.5 (0.68) 2.8 (0.82)

6,088 100.0 42.1 (2.65) 4.9 (1.62) 20.4 (1.92) 5.2 (1.03) 4.0 (0.73) 1.2 (0.60) 1.5 (0.59) 7.6 (1.27) 13.7 (1.45) 3.9 (0.91) 0.7 (0.30)

9,998 100.0 33.4 (1.91) 9.4 (1.23) 25.3 (1.54) 2.5 (0.70) 2.1 (0.66) 0.4 (0.17) 0.6 (0.21) 5.1 (0.74) 16.1 (1.31) 5.3 (0.89) 2.2 (0.50)

15,490 100.0 19.9 (1.23) 13.7 (0.97) 35.6 (1.34) 1.6 (0.31) 1.5 (0.30) * 0.3 (0.18) 2.9 (0.50) 19.1 (1.29) 3.7 (0.61) 3.1 (0.55)

20,578 100.0 22.3 (1.96) 12.3 (1.18) 29.2 (1.80) 11.8 (1.19) 10.7 (1.08) 1.0 (0.36) 1.9 (0.48) 1.9 (0.52) 14.4 (1.46) 4.0 (0.49) 2.2 (0.50)

4,692 100.0 40.9 (2.99) 1.8 (0.67) 10.2 (1.53) 12.0 (1.43) 10.0 (1.39) 2.0 (0.66) 4.9 (2.15) 13.9 (2.55) 12.0 (2.14) 3.0 (0.87) 1.4 (0.60)

1,712 100.0 30.8 (3.86) 3.6 (1.56) 23.7 (3.91) 15.6 (3.55) 12.7 (3.19) 2.9 (1.19) 5.5 (2.18) 3.3 (1.36) 10.1 (1.86) 4.9 (1.55) *

7,428 100.0 32.4 (3.11) 5.4 (1.56) 13.8 (1.74) 13.3 (2.03) 12.2 (2.01) 1.1 (0.24) 2.8 (1.09) 3.2 (0.74) 19.0 (2.24) 8.2 (1.32) 2.0 (0.51)

24,896 100.0 25.1 (1.19) 12.5 (0.94) 32.8 (1.22) 2.0 (0.36) 1.7 (0.32) 0.3 (0.10) 0.5 (0.15) 3.4 (0.41) 17.2 (0.87) 3.2 (0.45) 3.3 (0.47)

3,234 100.0 43.8 (3.36) 1.1 (0.50) 15.9 (2.25) 4.1 (1.03) 3.7 (1.05) * * 11.8 (1.73) 16.0 (1.95) 5.0 (1.37) 1.3 (0.52)

1,187 100.0 38.3 (5.43) 6.8 (2.31) 20.2 (3.60) * * – – 8.2 (2.36) 17.1 (2.88) 6.8 (3.96) *

5,649 100.0 37.9 (2.34) 4.9 (1.25) 19.4 (1.64) 4.8 (1.15) 3.7 (0.95) 1.1 (0.57) 1.0 (0.44) 5.7 (0.95) 17.7 (1.85) 7.1 (1.25) 1.5 (0.41)

12,209 100.0 24.5 (2.30) 4.2 (1.12) 25.8 (2.24) 14.2 (1.47) 11.9 (1.24) 2.3 (0.60) 3.1 (0.82) 5.2 (0.77) 16.4 (1.42) 5.3 (0.69) 1.2 (0.37)

19,671 100.0 23.9 (1.80) 10.8 (1.17) 27.6 (1.94) 10.5 (1.12) 9.7 (1.06) 0.8 (0.22) 2.2 (0.51) 2.7 (0.44) 14.5 (1.43) 4.9 (0.65) 2.8 (0.54)

5,706 100.0 30.5 (4.01) 7.8 (1.84) 19.8 (2.22) 10.3 (2.46) 9.3 (2.44) 1.0 (0.34) 2.7 (1.39) 9.1 (1.53) 15.4 (3.27) 3.5 (1.20) *

12,451 100.0 25.1 (1.86) 6.1 (0.77) 31.3 (1.66) 2.7 (0.53) 2.4 (0.49) 0.3 (0.15) 1.0 (0.32) 5.2 (0.76) 22.1 (1.30) 5.1 (0.99) 1.5 (0.34)

18,487 100.0 24.0 (1.32) 11.4 (1.22) 31.0 (1.26) 2.3 (0.33) 1.8 (0.27) 0.5 (0.19) 0.6 (0.17) 5.1 (0.61) 18.0 (1.01) 4.1 (0.51) 3.5 (0.55)

7,172 100.0 37.9 (2.20) 9.2 (1.67) 28.2 (2.79) 2.5 (0.86) 2.0 (0.85) 0.5 (0.23) * 6.9 (1.40) 10.7 (1.27) 1.6 (0.56) 2.9 (0.72)

ion.

ve ring.

IP is Children’s Health Insurance Program.

r insurance coverage are not shown separately; see Technical Notes for more detail.

owth, 2002 and 2011–2013.
Page 14	 National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

Technical Notes

Definition of terms

Age—The recode variable AGER

indicates the respondent’s age at the

time of interview.

Current contraceptive status—The

recode variable CONSTAT1 measures

the contraceptive method used (if any)

in the month of interview. In some

tables, only the subset of women

currently using a method are included.

Current health insurance

coverage—The recode variable

CURR_INS follows the collapsing rules

of the National Health Insurance Survey

and is the type of insurance coverage

the woman has at the time of interview.

The four categories are created

hierarchically and include:

1.Private insurance or Medigap

2.Medicaid, Children’s Health

Insurance Program, or a statesponsored health plan

3.Any other public insurance

(including military insurance) (33)

4.No insurance—Indian Health Service

coverage or a single-service plan

(for example, dental, vision, or

prescription coverage) are considered

as not having insurance in this

analysis

In 2002, the CURR_INS variable

was created after the data file was

released. Therefore, the variable was not

imputed like other recode variables.

Cases with missing data for 2002 are

not shown separately in this report.

Education—The recode variable

HIEDUC provides a measure of the

woman’s education, based on the highest

degree she has finished, at the date of

interview. Results are presented only for

respondents aged 22 and over because

many younger women have not

completed their education.

Hispanic origin and race—The

recode variable HISPRACE2 classifies

Hispanic origin and race according to

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) guidelines for the presentation

of race and origin data in federal

statistics. The 1997 OMB guidelines

that allow respondents to report more

than one race or ethnic origin are

followed (34). In this report, the

categories Hispanic, non-Hispanic white,

non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic

other single or multiple race are shown.

Intent to have more children—The

recode variable INTENT indicates

intentions for additional births. Only

two categories are shown in this report:

intends more and intends no more.

Women who reported not knowing their

fertility intentions are not shown

separately.

Marital and cohabiting status—The

recode variable RMARITAL indicates

the woman’s marital and cohabiting

status at the time of interview.

Metropolitan residence—The recode

variable METRO is based on the

woman’s address at the time of

interview and is classified according to

2000 (for 2002 National Survey Family

Growth [NSFG]) or 2010 (for 2011–

2013 NSFG) U.S. census population

counts. OMB defines metropolitan

statistical areas.

Parity—The recode variable

PARITY gives the total number of live

births the woman has had at the time of

interview.

Poverty-level income—The recode

variable POVERTY gives the

household’s income expressed as a

percentage of the poverty-level threshold

for a household of that size. The woman

reported her total family income for the

previous calendar year in the selfadministered ‘‘audio computer-assisted

self interview,’’ or ACASI, portion of

the interview. Her reported income, in

conjunction with the number of persons

living in the household, is compared to

the annual weighted poverty threshold

table for families of the same size as

published by the U.S. Census Bureau.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Center for Health Statistics

3311 Toledo Road, Room 5419

Hyattsville, MD 20782–2064

FIRST CLASS MAIL
 

POSTAGE & FEES PAID
 

CDC/NCHS
 

PERMIT NO. G-284
 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300

For more NCHS NHSRs, visit:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/nhsr.htm.

National Health Statistics Reports n Number 86 n November 10, 2015

Acknowledgments

The 2011–2013 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) and prior NSFG surveys were conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals.

Interviewing and other tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, under a contract with NCHS. The

2011–2013 NSFG was jointly planned and funded by the following programs and agencies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

• Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

• Office of Population Affairs

• National Center for Health Statistics, CDC

• Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, CDC

• Division of Sexually Transmitted Disease Prevention, CDC

• Division of Reproductive Health, CDC

• Division of Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, CDC

• Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, CDC

• Children’s Bureau of the Administration for Children and Families (ACF)

• Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, ACF

NCHS gratefully acknowledges the contributions of these programs and agencies, and all others who assisted in designing and carrying out the
 

2011–2013 NSFG.
 

This report was prepared under the general direction of Delton Atkinson, Director of NCHS’ Division of Vital Statistics (DVS), and Amy Branum,
 

Chief of the Reproductive Statistics Branch of DVS. The authors are grateful for the valuable comments provided by Anjani Chandra, NSFG
 

Team Leader; Amy Branum, Chief of the Reproductive Statistics Branch, DVS; Hanyu Ni, Associate Director for Science, DVS; and Jennifer
 

Madans, NCHS Associate Director for Science.
 

The report was edited and produced by NCHS Office of Information Services, Information Design and Publishing Staff: Jane Sudol edited the
 

report; typesetting was done by Zung Le, and graphics were produced by Erik Richardson (contractor).
 

Suggested citation

Daniels K, Daugherty J, Jones J, Mosher W.

Current contraceptive use and variation by

selected characteristics among women aged

15–44: United States, 2011–2013. National

health statistics reports; no 86. Hyattsville,

MD: National Center for Health Statistics.

2015.

Copyright information

All material appearing in this report is in the

public domain and may be reproduced or

copied without permission; citation as to

source, however, is appreciated.

National Center for Health Statistics

Charles J. Rothwell, M.S., M.B.A., Director

Nathaniel Schenker, Ph.D., Deputy Director

Jennifer H. Madans, Ph.D., Associate Director

for Science

Division of Vital Statistics

Delton Atkinson, M.P.H., M.P.H., P.M.P., Director
 

Hanyu Ni, Ph.D., M.P.H., Associate Director
 

for Science
 

For e-mail updates on NCHS publication releases, subscribe online at: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/govdelivery.htm.
 

For questions or general information about NCHS: Tel: 1–800–CDC–INFO (1–800–232–4636) • TTY: 1–888–232–6348
 

Internet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs • Online request form: http://www.cdc.gov/cdc-info
 

DHHS Publication No. 2016–1250 • CS260060