Use of Services for 

Family Pianning 

and infertility 

United States, 1982 

Statistics, based on data collected in 1982, 

are presented on the use of services for 

family planning and infertility by women 

1544 years of age who had ever had 

sexual intercourse. The percent who used 

services is shown by race, Hispanic origin, 

age, and selected socioeconomic 

characteristics. Users of services are shown 

by the source of the service and 

socioeconomic characteristics. 

Data From the 

National Survey of Family Growth 

Series 23, No. 13 

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 87-1989 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services 

Public Health Service 

National Center for Health Statistics 

Hyattsville, Md. 

December 1986 
Copyright Information 

All material appearing in this report IS rn the public domain and may be 

reproduced or copied wtthout permission; citation as to source, however, is 

appreciated. 

Suggested Citation 

Natronal Center for Health Statistics, M. C. Horn and W. D. Mosher: Use of 

services for family planning and infertility, Umted States, 1982. Vital and Health 

StatMcs. Series 23, No. 13. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 87-1989. Public Health 

Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Dec. 1986. 

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publiition Data 

Horn, Marjone C. 

Use of servrces for famrly planning and infertrlity, Unrted States, 1982. 

(Series 23, Data from the Natronal Survey of Family Growth ; no. 13) 

(DHHS Publication ; no. (PHS) 87-1989) 

By Marjorie C. Horn and Wrlliam D. Mosher. 

Brbliography: p. 

Supt. of Dots. no.: HE20.6209:23!13 

1. Birth control-Umted States. 2. Infertility-United States. 3. Birth control 

clmics-Umted States-Utilizatton-Statistics. I. Mosher, William D. II. National 

Center for Health Statrstics (U.S.). Ill. Title. IV. Series: Vital and health 

statistics. Series 23, Data from the national survey of family growth ; no. 13. 

V. Series: DHHS publication ; no. (PHS) 87-1989. [DNLM: 1. Community 

Health Services-utilization-United States. 2. Family Planning-United 

States-statistics. 3. Infertility-therapy-United States-statistics. 

W2 A N148vw no. 131 

HQ7665U5H67 1986 363.9’6’0973 88-600304 

ISBN 0-840~350-9 
National Center for Health Statistics 

Manning Feinleib, M.D., Dr.P.H., Director 

Robert A. Israel, Deputy Director 

Jacob J. Feldman, Ph.D., Associate Director for Analysis and 

Epidemiology 

Garrie J. Losee, Associate Director for Data Processing and 

Services 

Alvan 0. Zarate, Ph.D., Assistant Director for International 

Statistics 

Peter L. Hurley, Acting Associate Director for Interview and 

Examination Statistics 

Stephen E. Nieberding, Associate Director for Management 

Gail F. Fisher, Ph.D., Associate Director for Program Planning, 

Evaluation, and Coordination 

Monroe G. Sirken, Ph.D., Associate Director for Research and 

Methodology 

Peter L. Hurley, Associate Director for Vital and Health Care 

Statistics 

Wal and Health Care Statistics Program 

Peter L. Hurley, Associate Director 

Gloria Kapantais, Assistant to the Director for Data Policy, 

Planning, and Analysis 

Division of Vital Statistics 

John E. Patterson, Director 

James A. Weed, Ph.D., Deputy Director 

William F. Pratt, Ph.D., ChieJ Family Growth Survey Branch 

Joseph D. Farrell, ChieJ Computer Applications Stag 

Mabel G. Smith, ChieJ Statistical Resources Branch 
Acknowledgments 

The 1982 National Survey of Family Growth was 

funded jointly by the National Center for Health Statistics, 

the National Institute of Child Health and Human 

Development, and the Office of Population Affairs, all of 

the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 
Contents 

Introduction ...................................................... 

Summary of principal findings ............................................. 

Source and limitations of the data ........................................... 

Ever-use of services for family planning ........................................ 

Age at first visit ................................................... 

Source of services .................................................. 

Services used .................................................... 

Visitsinthelast3years ................................................ 

Source of services .................................................. 

Changes in source of services between first and most recent visit ........................... 

Servicesused .................................................... 

Source of payment for services ............................................ 

Visits in the last 12 months ............................................... 

use of ancillary medical services ........................................... 

Use of services for infertility .............................................. 

References.. ..................................................... 

List of detailed tables ................................................. 

Appendixes 

I. Technical notes .................................................. 

II. Definitions of terms ................................................ 

III. Section E of the Under 25 questionnaire ...................................... 

List of figures 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Percent of women 15-H years of age who ever had sexual intercourse who ever used family planning services, 

by education, region of residence, and religion: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Percent of women 15-24 years of age who used selected services at the first family planning visit, by marital 

status: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Percent of women 15-M years of age who used family planning services in the last 3 years, by age and race: 

United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Percent of black women 15-44 years of age who used family planning services in the last 3 years, by age and 

source of services: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Family planning visits in the last I2 months per 1,000 women by women I- years of age, by marital status 

and source of service: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Percent of women 15-44 years of age who used family planning services in the last 12 months who received a 

VD test, by race, source of service, and region of residence: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Percent of women 15-44 years of age who ever used family planning services who were age 17 or younger at first 

visit and percent of women 20-44 years of age who ever used family planning services who were age 17 or younger 

at first visit, by marital status and education: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

1 

2 

7 

9 

9 

10 

11 

13 

13 

14 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

45 

50 

52 

10 

V 
List of text tables 

A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

E. 

F. 

Mean age at first family planning visit of all women 154 years of age who ever used family planning services, by 

selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever used family planning services and percent who received a 

pregnancy test but received neither a birth control method nor birth control counseling at first family planning visit, 

by income and education: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + . . . . . . . . . . 

Number of women 154 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date 

of interview and number of family planning visits in the last 12 months per 1,000 women, by current contraceptive 

method: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 

Percent of women 15-44 years of age who used family planning services in the last 12 months who received a 

VD test, by race, source of service, and region of residence: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . 

Percent of currently married women 15-44 years of age who ever received infertility services, by infertility status 

and race: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever received infertility services and percent distribution by specific 

service received, according to race: United States, 1982 . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

10 

11 

16 

17 

18 

18 

Symbols 

--- Data not available 

. . . Category not applicable 

Quantity zero 

0.0 Quantity more than zero but less than 

0.05 

Z Quantity more than zero but less than 

500 where numbers are rounded to 

thousands 

* Figure does not meet standard of 

reliability or precision 

# Figure suppressed to comply with 

confidentiality requirements 

vi 
Use of Sewices for 

Family Planning 

and Infertility 

by Marjorie C. Horn, Ph.D., and William D. Mosher, Ph.D., 

Division of Vital Statistics 

Introduction 

The National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) is a 

periodic survey conducted by the National Center for Health 

Statistics, and designed to produce national estimates of statistics on fertility, family planning, and aspects of maternal 

and child health that are closely related to childbearing. This 

report presents data on the following aspects of family planning 

and infertility services: 

0 The percent of persons who had ever made a family 

planning visit, age at first visit, and services received 

at first visit; 

0 Visits in the last 3 years, by type of service provider, 

kinds of services received, and source of payment; 

@ Annual visit rates, by provider type; 

0 Infertility services, including type of services received, 

and most recent source. 

The statistics presented here are final revised data on use 

of family planning services by women IS-44 years of age 

from Cycle III of the NSFG, which was conducted in 1982, 

and supersede the preliminary data published in the Advance 

Data series. ’ 

Since the mid-1960’s, the proportion of births to married 

women that were unplanned at conception has dropped drastically, from 65 to 29 percent. ’ This dramatic reduction has 

been accompanied by equally sweeping changes in contraceptive use among American women-especially the shift toward 

sterilization, the pill, and the IUD. All of these methods 

require at least one visit to a doctor or a clinic to begin 

use.2 Furthermore, use of the pill requires frequent follow-up 

visits to renew the prescription and check for side effects. 

Because of this close connection between the most effective 

methods of contraception and the need to get them from 

a physician, a complete understanding of contraceptive practice 

and family growth in the United States requires knowledge 

about the patterns of use of family planning services. Further, 

because never-married childless women were included in the 

sample for the first time in 1982, it was possible to determine 

use of family planning services for all women of childbearing 

age who had ever had sexual intercourse. 

The birth control pill and the IUD made effective and 

convenient contraception available to virtually all women.3 

However, the necessity of physician services for using these 

methods was an important factor in their accessibility. Research 

in the sixties revealed that low-income women wanted about 

the same number of children as other women, but had more 

unplanned pregnancies because they had inadequate access 

to contraceptive services. ‘J At the same time, other studies 

showed that bearing many children at relatively close intervals, 

or childbearing very early or very late in the reproductive 

years were associated with adverse health, social, and 

economic conditions for mothers and children alike.-%’ 

Family planning services became available through organized medical programs beginning in the mid-1960’s, but 

the first major legislation in this area was the Family Planning 

Services and Population Research Act of 1970, which amended 

the public Health Service Act to create Title X.6*9*1o The 

major purpose of Title X was to provide family planning 

and infertility services on a voluntary basis to those who 

needed and wanted them, including adolescents, but priority 

was given to programs serving low-income women and their 

families.g-” Federal support for family planning services is 

also provided under Title XIX of the Social Security Act 

(Medicaid).‘” Two other important sources of funding for 

family planning services, Titles V (Maternal and Child Health) 

and XX (Social Services) were combined with other programs 

into block grants, which are administered by the states, under 

the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 198 1. ” 

Data were collected in the National Survey of Family 

Growth to distinguish the sources of family planning services, 

particularly those by private physicians or group practices 

and those by clinics or organized medical services. The use 

of these different sources by various segments of the population 

is discussed in detail in this report. 
Summary of principal findings 

Of the 47 million women aged 15-44 in 1982 who had 

ever had intercourse, about 5 out of 6 had ever used family 

planning services at some time. Family planning services considered in this report are of two types. The first is advice 

or counseling about birth control, sterilization, sexual intercourse, or an unwanted pregnancy. The second type, which 

is referred to as “Medical Services,” includes check-ups or 

tests for correct use or fit of a birth control method, or for 

health problems from using a birth control method; pregnancy 

tests; and visits to obtain a new method of birth control, 

or to renew the current method. Medical services are provided 

only by trained medical personnel in clinics or by private 

doctors, but advice and counseling also can be obtained from 

a non-medical source including, for example, a school counselor, or a minister, priest or other religious counselor. This 

is a broader definition of family planning services than that 

used in Cycles I and II of the NSFG. Previously, use of 

family planning services was measured by a single question 

on whether the respondent had talked with a doctor or other 

trained person about some method of birth control. Because 

this earlier measure seriously underestimates use of family 

planning services, the more inclusive measure is used in this 

report. Statistics on use of family planning according to both 

measures are included in an earlier report. ’ 

Data also were collected on several ancillary medical 

services received at family planning visits during the 12 months 

before the survey. Those services-for example, a pap smear 

or a pelvic examination- are not included in the statistics 

on use of family planning services, but are reported separately. 

“Ever-use” of family planning services relates to all women 

15-44 years of age who had ever had sexual intercourse, 

while data on services during either the past 3 years or the 

past I2 months are limited to women who had had intercourse 

and who were not themselves sterile, or whose husbands 

were not sterile, 3 years before the interview, 

The typical white woman who had ever used family planning services had her first visit before she turned 21, at the 

offices of a private doctor. At that first family planning visit, 

she typically received some type of medical services, but 

did not obtain a method of birth control; she also received 

counseling, including birth control counseling. At her most 

recent visit in the last 3 years, she went to a private doctor 

and received medical services that did not include starting 

or renewing a method. The visit was paid for by herself, 

her family or friends, and insurance. In the last 12 months, 

she had about one visit on average for family planning, mostly 

to private doctors; and she received a number of ancillary 

medical services, including a pap smear, pelvic exam, breast 

exam, blood pressure test, and urinalysis. 

The typical black family planning user is different in 

several respects. She made her first visit before age 20, to 

a clinic (not to a private doctor), and-like the typical white 

woman-she received counseling, including birth control 

counseling, at the first visit, as well as medical services. 

At the last visit in the 3 years before the survey, the typical 

black family planning user visited a clinic for medical services. 

The visit was most often paid for by herself and her family 

or friends, but, more often than among white women., payment 

was by Medicaid or other government assistance. She had, 

on average, about 1.3 family planning visits in the last 12 

months, mostly to clinics, and she received the same list 

of ancillary medical services that white women did, as well 

as a test for venereal disease. Of course, there were many 

variations from these typical patterns and they will be analyzed 

in detail. 

Over 70 percent of sexually experienced women in every 

age, race, and Hispanic origin group reported at least one 

family planning visit. Women who were never married, Catholic, or residents of the Northeast region were less likely to 

have ever used family planning services than ever-married 

women, Protestants, or women who lived in any of the other 

three regions of the United States. Also, women in the lowest 

education group were less likely to have ever used family 

planning services than women with at least a high school 

education (figure 1). 

The mean age at first family planning visit was about 

21 years for all women, and for white women. Black women, 

on average, were about a year younger (mean age of 20 

years), and Hispanic women slightly older (age 21.5) at first 

family planning visit. 

Data on source of first family planning visit shovv that 

women aged 15-24 at the survey were as likely to have 

had their first visit at a private doctor as at a clinic (49 

compared with 48 percent). However, clinics were used more 

often than private doctors as the first source of family planning 

services for teenagers, black women, never-married women, 

low-income, and less-educated women. In contrast, white 

women aged 20-24, currently-married women, higher-income, 

more-educated, or Catholic women were more likely to have 

received services from a private medical source than from 

a clinic. Very few women reported a non-medical counselor 

as their first source of family planning services (3 percent). 

2 
100 1 

so - 87 87 a5 85 86 

83 79 79 ' 80 

80 - 

70 - 

60 - 

E 

8 

z 

50 - 

a 

40 - 

30 - 

20 - 

10 - 

0 

Less than 12 years 13 years Northeast Midwest South West Protestant Catholic 

12 years or more 

Education Region Religion 

FQure 1. Percent of women 15-44 years of age who ever bed sexual intercourse who ever used femQ piennirg eervfoeq by education, region of 

residence, and religion: United States, 1982 

Within each age and race group, about the same proportion 

of women received medical services as received advice or 

counseling at the first family planning visit. The data suggest 

that among Hispanic women, however, a larger proportion 

received medical services than advice and counseling. Further, 

within each group, a larger percent obtained advice or counseling on birth control than accepted 3 method of contraception, 

but the difference was not significant among Hispanic women. 

White women were more likely than black women to have 

received medical services, and the data suggest they also 

were more likely to have obtained a birth control method 

at their first family planning visit. Never-married women were 

more likely than currently-married women to have received 

advice and counseling at their first visit, but were about as 

likely to have begun a method of birth control (figure 2). 

Smaller proportions of lower-income or less-educated women 

obtained birth control advice or counseling, or obtained a 

method of birth control at first visit, than did higher-income 

or more-educated women. 

Of all women aged 154 who had ever had intercourse, 

about 37 million were non-sterile 3 years before the survey, 

and thus were potential recent users of family planning services. Nearly 77 percent of those women reported at least 

one family planning visit in the past 3 years. The percent 

reporting one or more visits during the past 3 years was 

nearly constant to age 25-34 years, and then dropped off 

sharply for women aged 35-44 in each race group (figure 3). Ever-married women were more likely then never-married women to have had a family planning visit in the last 

3 years (79 compared with 73 percent). The percent who 

made a family planning visit in the past 3 years did not 

differ by income, but it increased with education, from 73 

percent among women with less than 12 years to 79 percent 

among those with at least some college. 

At the most recent family planning service visit, private 

medical services were used by two-thirds of women and clinics 

by one-third in contrast to the even distribution between clinics 

and private doctors at the first family planning visit. Teenagers 

are a major exception. Women 15-19 were equally as likely 

to report a clinic as a private doctor as the most recent family 

planning source. Black women as a group were more likely 

to have visited a clinic than a private medical source at the 

most recent visit, due primarily to heavy clinic use by young 

black women; black women age 21-44 were more likely to 

obtain services from a private medical source (figure 4). 

Data also were collected on the source of payment for 

the most recent family planning visit. The results show that 

women who obtained services from clinics-teenagers, black 

women, never-married women, and those in the lowest income 

and education groups-were more likely to have paid for 

the visit through Medicaid or other governmental sources than 

were women who obtained family planning services from 

private medical sources. 

3 
80 

70 

60 

50 

E 

8 40 

b 

a 

30 

20 

IO 

0 / 

40 39 40 

Never Currently Formerly 

married married married 

Eegln method of 

birth control 

72 

64 

59 - 

Never Currently Formerly 

married marrfed married 

Advice or counseling’ 

60 

50 52 

Never Currently Formerly 

married married married 

Advice on birth 

control only 

‘Advice or counseling for: problems or worries about sexual intercourse, an unwanted or mis-timed pregnancy, a sterilizing operation, or birth control. 

Fyure 2. Percent of women 15-24 years of age who used selected services at the first family planning visit, by marital status: United States, 1982 

90 

80 

70 

60 

E 

zi 

iii 50 

a 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 - 

a2 a3 

66 

83 

56 

15-24 26-34 36-44 15-24 26-34 3644 16-24 26-34 35-44 

years years years years years years years years years 

All races’ White Black 

‘Includes white, black, and other races. 

Fgure 3. Percent of women 1544 years of age who used family planning services in the last 3 years, by age and race: United States, 1982 

4 
80 

70 

60 

20 

10 

0 

34 

Private 

64 

Clinics 

mealcal 

services 

15-24 years 

55 

Private 

medical 

services 

66 

44 

- 

Private 

medical 

services 

25-34 years 

32 

1 

Clinics 

35-44 years 

Figura 4. Percent of black women 15-44 years of age who used family planning set-&es in the last 3 years, by age and source of services: 

unitecl states, 1982 

On average, sexually active women who were not sterile 

3 years before the survey used family planning services at 

a rate of slightly more than one visit per woman annually 

(1,078 visits per 1,000 women per year) during the last 12 

months. Never-married women made more visits for family 

planning services than did women who had been married 

(I ,227 compared with 1,012 visits per 1,000 women, respectively). Teenagers had the highest annual visit rate of any 

of the age groups ( 1,581 per thousand). Annual visit rates 

also were higher for black and low-income women, compared 

with white women and higher-income women. 

Visit rates also differed by source of services. Overall, 

during the 12 months before the interview, women visited 

private medical sources for family planning services at a higher 

rate than clinics (657 compared with 385 visits per 1,000 

women). However, visit rates by source of family planning 

service varied by age, race, marital status, income level, 

and education. Among teenagers, black women, never-married 

women, and those with less education, clinic visit rates were 

higher than visit rates to private medical services. In contrast, 

visit rates to private medical services were higher than clinic 

visit rates among women aged 25-44, white women, ever-married women, higher-income, and more-educated women. Differences in sources of family planning services by marital 

status are shown in figure 5. 

In addition to services that directly meet their family 

planning needs, during family planning visits many women 

obtain other services that are important screening procedures 

for maintaining reproductive health. Over 80 percent of women 

in virtually every socioeconomic group who had made a family 

planning visit during the past 12 months had had a pap smear, 

pelvic and breast exams, blood pressure test and urinalysis 

during a family planning visit, but only 50 percent reported 

a test for venereal disease. The percent who had a VD test 

differed sharply by race, source of service, and region of 

residence. A higher percent of black women reported a VD 

test compared with white women; women who received services from a clinic were more likely than those who went 

to a private medical service to have had a test for venereal 

disease: women living in the South were more likely to have 

had a VD test than women living in the other three regions 

(figure 6). 

About 14 percent of women 15-44 years of age had 

ever used services for infertility. In general, the type of service 

received was advice or treatment to help the woman get pregnant rather than to avoid miscarriage. A smaller percent of 

women aged 15-24 had ever received services for infertility 

compared with women aged 25-44. Above age 24, black 

women were less likely than white women to have ever used 

infertility services. Never-married, low-income, and less-educated women were less likely to have ever received infertility 

services than ever-married women, those with higher incomes, 

or those with 12 years or more of schooling. Women who 

had ever received infertility services received them primarily 

from private medical sources. 

5 
1.3 1,227 

1.2 

1.1 

1 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0 

1,022 

971 

Never C;;rre;;y Formerly Never Currently Formerly Never Currently Formerly 

married married married married married married married married 

All sources Private medical services Clinics 

‘Includes private medical services, clinics, and counselors. 

636 

I 1 

360 

251 

Faure 5. Family planning visits in the last 12 months per 1,000 women by women 16-44 years of age, by marital status and source of service: 

United States, 1982 

80 

70 

60 

50 

E 

8 

cl 

40 

a 

30 

20 

10 

0 

67 

61 

50 

47 47 45 46 46 

- 

t 

. 

White Black Private 

medical 

services 

Clinics Northeast Midwest South West 

Race Source of service Region 

Fgure 6. Percent of women 1644 years of age who used family planning services in the last 12 months who received a VD test, by race, source of 

service, and region of residence: United States, 1982 
Source and limitations of 

the data 

Cycle III of the National Survey of Family Growth was 

based on personal interviews with a multistage area probability 

sample of 7,969 women 15-44 years of age in the noninstitutionalized population of the conterminous United States. 

For the first time, women were eligible for the interview 

regardless of their marital status. 

Between August of 1982 and February of 1983, 4,577 

white, 3,201 black, and 191 women of other races were 

interviewed. Women 15-19 years of age and black women 

were sampled at higher rates than other women, to increase 

the reliability of the statistics for these groups. The interview 

focused on the respondents’ marital and pregnancy histories, 

their use of contraception, whether each pregnancy was 

planned at the time of conception, their use of family planning 

and infertility services, their physical ability to bear children, 

and a wide range of social and economic characteristics. Interviews were conducted in person by trained female interviewers 

and lasted an average of 1 hour. 

The statistics in this report are estimates for the national 

population from which the sample was drawn. Because the 

estimates are based on a sample, they are subject to sampling 

variability. Also, nonsampling errors may have been introduced during data collection, processing, and analysis, although quality control measures were used at each stage to 

minimize error. Further discussion of the survey design, definition of terms, and sampling variability can be found both 

in appendixes I and II of this report and in a special report 

on the design of the survey. ” 

The term “similar” means that any observed difference 

between two estimates being compared is not statistically significant; terms such as “greater,” “less,” “larger,” and “smaller” indicate that the observed differences are statistically significant at the 5-percent level using a 2-tailed r-test with 

39 degrees of freedom. Statements about differences that are 

qualified in some way (e.g., “the data suggest” or “some 

evidence”) indicate that the difference is significant at the 

lo-percent level but not at the 5-percent level. 

For convenience in writing, women from households with 

incomes of less than 150 percent of poverty level income 

are classified here as “low-income women.” Those from households with income of 150 percent or more of poverty income 

are referred to as “high-income women.” Similarly, women 

with fewer than 12 years of schooling are characterized as 

“less-educated” while those with at least a high school education are called “more-educated.” 

The statistics on use of family planning and infertility 

services in this report are based on a series of questions 

reproduced in appendix III. The data presented here relate 

to use of family planning services at several points in time. 

Statistics on ever-use of family planning services apply to 

all women aged 15-44 who had ever had intercourse, while 

data on family planning services during either the past 3 

years or the past 12 months are limited to women who had 

had intercourse and who were not sterile and whose husbands 

were not sterile 3 years before the interview. A woman was 

classified as sterile if she reported that it was impossible 

for her to conceive as a result of: (1) an operation, on herself 

or her husband, that occurred more than 3 years before the 

interview; or (2) non-surgical factors known to her 3 or more 

years before the interview. All other women were assumed 

to be able to conceive at the beginning of the 3-year period 

for which use of family planning services was reported, and 

are referred to as “non-sterile” throughout this report. 

Nevertheless, some of these women will have become sterile 

because of an operation that occurred or non-surgical condition 

that developed during the 3 years before the interview. 

Data on family planning services also are available from 

two other surveys conducted by NCHS. Data from the National 

Reporting System for Family Planning Services (NRSFPS) 

were collected annually from 1972 through 1980 from a sample 

of clinics that provided family planning services. These data 

excluded family planning visits to private physicians’ offices, 

visits for pregnancy tests only, and visits made only to obtain 

contraceptive supplies or counseling. Data on family planning 

visits and on women who use family planning clinics are 

available from NRSFPS for 1980 and some earlier years. 15*‘6 

The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCES) 

obtains data on visits for family planning services from reports 

from a sample of office-based physicians.‘7,‘8 Data on family 

planning services from the NSFG differ in many respects 

from the other two surveys. The differences include the following: the NRSFPS was terminated in 1981 and covered only 

clinics; the NAMCES covers only private doctor’s offices 

and omits clinics, while the NSFG covers both public and 

private sources. The other two systems used a narrower definition of a family planning visit than the NSFG. In addition, 

the other two surveys were based on reports from providers, 

while the NSFG is based on information from recipients of 

services. Because of these differences in collection procedures 

and definitions of terms, data from these sources may differ. 

7 
Estimates of annual numbers of visits to private physicians’ 

offices for infertility in I%&1980 from the National Disease 

and Therapeutic Index (NDTI) were published in an article 

in the Journal of the American Medical Association,” and 

later updated through 1983. ” These data are not comparable 

with the statistics in this report because they refer to visits, 

and women may have more than one visit in a year; because 

the NDTI data refer only to visits made at private physicians’ 

offices and the NSFG data include clinic visits; and because 

both estimates, being based on samples, are subject to sampling 

variability. 

In this report, tables 1 and 2 present statistics on ever-use 

of family planning services, and on age at first family planning 

visit. More detailed data on the first visit are presented in 

tables 3-6 for women aged 15-24. These women would have 

made their first family planning visit more recently than women 

aged 2544 and, therefore, were expected to be able to recall 

the details of that visit more accurately than older women. 

In addition to ever-use, two measures of recent use of family 

planning services are employed: use of services during the 

past 3 years, and use during the past 12 months. Tables 7-l 3 present statistics on family planning services during 

the past 3 years; data on visits during the past 12 months 

are shown in tables 14-17. Statistics on use of infertility 

services are found in tabies 18-2 1. 
Ever-use of services for 

family planning 

Family planning services are used by the majority of 

American women at some time in their reproductive lives. 

In the 1982 NSFG, women were asked a detailed series of 

questions to determine the extent and type of family planning 

services they had ever received. Family planning services 

are not limited to supplying effective means of contraception. 

In this report, family planning services are classified as either 

“Medical Services” or “Advice or Counseling.” In addition 

to obtaining a method of birth control, “Medical Services” 

include check-ups or medical tests for correct use or fit of 

a contraceptive method, or for side-effects from a method, 

and pregnancy tests. “Advice or Counseling” includes counseling concerning problems with sexual intercourse, an unwanted 

pregnancy, sterilization, and birth control. A full list of services 

included in these categories is included in appendix II. 

Providers of family planning services are of three types: 

private doctors, clinics, and non-medical counselors (such 

as a school counselor, a priest, a minister, or another religious 

counselor). Both medical services and advice or counseling 

are provided by doctors or clinics, but only family planning 

services classified as advice and counseling are available from 

non-medical counselors. 

Of the approximately 47 million women 1.54 years 

of age in 1982 who had ever had intercourse, 84 percent 

or 39 million reported having had a family planning visit 

at least once (table 1). Over 70 percent of women in all 

age, race, and Hispanic origin groups reported at least one 

family planning visit. This high level of use is not surprising 

in light of the heavy reliance of American women on contraceptives requiring medical intervention, such as the pill, the IUD, 

and sterilization. In fact, of American women who use contraception, 2 out of 3 (69 percent) use these three methods.* 

As shown in table 1, the percent of women who had 

ever used family planning services increased with age from 

78 percent among women 15-19 years of age to 91 percent 

among women 25-34 years of age, and then declined to 

75 percent among women aged 35-44 years. A steady increase 

to age 25-34, with a sharp drop at ages 354, is also present 

among white women; among black women the increase with 

age is less marked. Nevertheless, black women older than 

34 years were less likely to have ever used family planning 

services than black women aged 15-34. 

The pronounced drop at age 35-44 years in the percents 

who had ever used family planning services suggests a recent 

increase in the use of services at younger ages. If there 

had been no change, women aged 35-44 would have higher 

cumulative rates of use than younger women. It seems likely 

that the change stems both from the greater availability of 

family planning services and from the increased reliance 

among younger women on contraceptives that require a 

prescription.2*2* 

The proportion of women who had ever used family planning services also varied with their socioeconomic characteristics, as shown in table 2. Ever-use of family planning services 

increased with level of education from 79 percent of women 

with less than 12 years of school to 87 percent among women 

with 1 or more years of college. In addition, never-married 

women were less likely to have used services than currentlyor previously-married women, as were Catholics compared 

with Protestants, and women living in the Northeast region 

compared with other regions of the country (79 percent compared with 85 or 87 percent) (figure 1). The difference between 

the Northeast and the other three regions is partly the result 

of differences in religious composition. Over half the women 

in the Northeast region were Catholic (51 percent) compared 

with 33 percent, 20 percent and 30 percent in the Midwest, 

South, and West regions, respectively. 

Religious composition, in turn, undoubtedly has influenced use of family planning services through differences 

in contraceptive methods. For example, Catholics were much 

less likely than Protestants to have ever used the pill (68 

compared with 81 percent), and were more likely to have 

ever used periodic abstinence (23 compared with 16 percent).22 

Use of the pill requires frequent visits to clinics or doctors 

to check for side-effects and to renew the prescription; in 

contrast, periodic abstinence, a non-medical method, does 

not necessarily require even one family planning visit. 

Age at first visit 

Over half of women ages 15-44 had their first family 

planning visit as a teenager; 26 percent had their first visit 

before age 18, and 28 percent at ages 18-19 (table 1). An 

additional 33 percent made a first visit at ages 20-24. The 

mean age at first family planning visit was about 21 years 

for all women and for white women (table A). Black women 

were younger, with a mean age of about 20 years at first 

use of family planning services, and Hispanic women were 

slightly older (21.5 years). The difference by race in mean 

age at first use of family planning reflects variation in the 

initiation of sexual activity. The mean age at first intercourse 

among black women was 17 years, compared with 18.6 years 

among white women. 

9 
Table A. Mean age at first family planning visit of all women 15-44 years 

of age who ever used family planning services, by selected 

characteristics: United States, 1982 

Characteristic 

Mean age 

15-44 years 20-44 years 

All women’ .................... 

Race 

White ....................... 

Black ....................... 

Origin 

Hispanic ...................... 

Non-Hispanic ................... 

Marital status 

Never married ................... 

Currently married ................. 

Widowed, divorced, or separated ........ 

Education 

Less than 12 years ................ 

12 years. ..................... 

13yearsormore ................. 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less ................ 

150 percent or more ............... 

20.7 21.1 

20.6 21.1 

19.9 20.4 

21.5 22.2 

20.6 21 .o 

16.9 19.8 

21.3 21.4 

21.1 21.2 

19.5 20.5 

20.6 20.9 

21.3 21.4 

19.7 20.4 

21.0 21.3 

‘Includes white, black, and other races. 

Overall, 87 percent of women who had ever used family 

planning services were younger than 25 years of age at their 

first visit, as were the majority of women in all subgroups 

shown in table 2. Statistics in table 2 show a tendency for 

women who were never married, had low income, or who had 

less than a high school education at the time of the survey to 

have made their first family planning visit at a young age. However, these results are partly due to the fact that never-married 

women and women with less than a high school education were 

younger at the survey and thus had less opportunity to make a 

visit at ages older than 17 years. The effects of current age may 

be seen in figure 7, which shows the percents of all women and 

the percents of women ages 20-44 who first obtained family 

planning services at age 17 or younger, by marital status and 

education. When teenagers are excluded, the proportion of 

never-married women and of women with less than a high 

school education whose first visit for family planning occurred 

at age 17 or younger drops sharply. The effects of the age distribution also are seen in the younger mean age at first visit for 

these groups. Table A shows that the mean ages for currentlyand formerly-married women are about 21 years, while that for 

never-married women is only 19 years. When teenagers are 

excluded, however, the mean age at first visit for never-married 

women rises to nearly 20 years, and the mean age for women 

with low education increases from 19.5 to 20.5 years. 

Source of services 

As noted in the introduction, a major purpose of publicly 

funded family planning programs is to ensure access of all 

women to reproductive health services. Although the programs 

emphasize services to low-income women, they also serve 

adolescents. Especially in the case of teenagers, family planning clinics are often the entry point into the adult health 

care system. ” To examine the initial contact with reproductive 

health services in more detail, women 15-24 years of age 

were asked questions about the source and type of services 

received at the first visit. The questions were limited to these 

ages because the younger women would have made their 

first family planning visit more recently and, therefore, should 

be able to recall that visit more accurately than older women. 

Overall, first visits were about equally divided between 

private medical sources and clinics (49 and 48 percent, respectively, table 3). Only 3 percent first received services from 

a non-medical counselor. The most outstanding difference 

in table 3 is that by race: black women were far more likely 

60 

Never Currently Formerly Never Currently Formerly Less than 12 years 13 years Less than 12 years 13 years 

married married married married married married 12 years or more 12 years or more 

15-44 years 20-44 years 15-44 years 20-44 years 

Marital status Education 

Fgure 7. Percent of women 1544 years of age who ever used family planning services who were age 17 or younger at first visit and percent of women 

20-44 years of age who ever used family planning services who were age 17 or younger at first visit, by marital status and education: United States, 1982 

10 
than white women, at each age, to use clinics at the first 

family planning visit (7 1 compared with only 43 percent). 

There are only a limited number of studies that examine 

the reasons for choice of family planning service provider, and 

the data available relate primarily to teenagers. However, over 

80 percent of women of all races, ages 15-24, made their 

first family planning visit as a teenager (table 1). The studies 

of teenagers suggesthat cost of the services, desire for confidentiality, and lack of knowledge of alternative sources were influential reasons for going to a clinic rather than to a private medical 

doctor for family planning services.sz Our results, which 

show a greater propensity for teenagers, black women, nevermarried women, and those in the lowest income and education 

groups to select a clinic as their first source of family planning 

services, are consistent with those studies (tables 3 and 4). 

In contrast, white women age 20-24, currently-married 

women, those in the higher income groups, women with 12 

years of education, and Catholics were more likely to have 

obtained services from a private medical source at their first 

family planning visit. 

Services used 

As discussed at the beginning of this section, family 

planning services include both medical services and advice 

or counseling on various aspects of family planning. Statistics 

presented here are based on all family planning services reported, and many women reported more than one type. Twothirds of women aged 15-24 obtained medical services at 

their first family planning visit, and two-thirds received advice 

or counseling (table 5). However, 56 percent received counseling on birth control at the first visit, while only 40 percent 

actually obtained a method of birth control. 

The same general pattern of services used at first family 

planning visit is found for most of the groups in table 5. 

The exception is Hispanic women, who appear to be more 

likely to report receiving medical services than advice or 

counseling at first visit. For all of the groups shown, a larger 

percent reported that they received advice or counseling on 

birth control than reported that they began a birth control 

method at the first visit, although the difference is not significant for Hispanic women. 

Overall and for white women, teenagers were less likely 

than women aged 20-24 to have begun a method of birth 

control at the first visit, but for black women, the difference 

is not significant (30 compared with 37 percent). 

A larger proportion of white than black women received 

medical services at the first family planning visit (68 compared 

with 60 percent). In addition, white women were slightly 

more likely than black women to have obtained a method 

of birth control. 

Never-married women were more likely to have obtained 

counseling than medical services at their first visit (72 compared with 65 percent), while the reverse was true for currentlymarried women (table 6). About 69 percent of currently-married women aged 15-24 reported receiving medical services 

at their first family planning visit, while only 59 percent 

obtained advice or counseling. Women in the highest education 

and income groups at the time of the survey are more likely 

to report that they received advice or counseling than medical 

services at their first family planning visit, but the differences 

are not significant. 

The percents of women who received advice or counseling 

on birth control are larger than the percents who obtained 

a method of birth control in all of the subgroups shown in 

table 6, although a few of the differences are not statistically 

significant. Despite this common pattern, there are sharp differences between some groups in the percent who received particular services. Never-married women are much more likely 

than currently-married women to have obtained advice or 

counseling at the first visit (72 compared with 59 percent), 

and are also more likely than married women to have received 

advice or counseling specifically on birth control (60 percent 

compared with 50 percent) (figure 2). 

Women in the low income group at the survey were 

less likely to report birth control advice or counseling or 

obtaining a birth control method at their first family planning 

visit than were women with higher incomes. A smaller percent 

of women received birth control advice among those with 

less than 12 years of education compared with women with 

more than a high school education (48 and 62 percent, respectively). The trend by level of education is even more pronounced for the percent who obtained a method of birth control 

at the first visit, which rises from 27 percent at the lowest 

educational level to 5 1 percent at the highest. 

It appears that many low-income, less-educated women 

were seeking other types of services besides contraception 

in their initial contact with a family planning services provider. 

A suspected pregnancy seems to be a primary reason for 

first seeking out family planning services among those not 

seeking contraception advice or supplies (table B). About 

31 percent of less-educated women compared with only 8 

percent of more-educated women had a pregnancy test but 

Income and edvcxdon 

Number of women 

in tthwsands 

Pemt with 

pregnancy 

test’ 

All women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,342 19.4 

Povetly level income 

149 percent or less . . . . . . . . . . 

150 percent or more . . . . . . . . . 

300 percent or more . . . . . . . . 

Education 

4,435 26.6 

6,907 14.8 

3,680 ii.8 

Less than 12 years . . . _ . . . _ . 3,228 31.2 

12 years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,776 19.4 

13 years or more . . . . . . . . . . . 3,338 8.0 

‘Pement who received a pregnancy lest but nd a birth control m&ed or birth control 

counsfJlii. 

11 
received neither a new method of birth control, nor advice reportedly used a method of contraception at first intercourse, 

or counseling on contraception at first visit. These results compared with 61 percent among women with 13 years or 

are consistent with statistics on use of contraception at first more of schooling. Similarly, low-income women were less 

intercourse. Only 32 percent of women aged 15-24 who had likely than higher-income women to report use at first interless than a high school education at the time of the survey course (40 compared with 59 percent).‘* 
Visits in the last 3 years 

In addition to estimating ever-use of family planning services among all women who had ever had sexual intercourse, 

it is also important to determine the extent of more recent 

use. To obtain estimates of recent use of family planning, 

a series of questions was asked on use of services and source 

of services during the 3 years before the survey. To define 

more precisely the population of potential users of services, 

this sequence of questions was asked only of women who 

had ever had intercourse and were not sterile themselves and 

whose husbands were not sterile 3 years before the survey. 

Of the 37 million women aged 15-44 in 1982 who were 

potential users of family planning services in the past 3 years, 

29 million or 77 percent reported at least one visit in those 

3 years (table 7). About four out of five women aged 15-34 

had used family planning services during the 3 years before 

the survey; after age 35, this percent dropped sharply to 55 

percent. This pattern also is found for white and black women 

separately (figure 3). The same reduction with age in recent 

use of family planning services is found for non-Hispanic 

and Hispanic women at ages 30-44, although the difference 

is not statistically significant among Hispanics. 

Although the population considered in table 7 excludes 

women who were sterile 3 years before the survey, women 

who became sterile because of an operation or a non-surgical 

condition during the 3-year reference period are included. 

The majority of such women were undoubtedly in the age 

group 35-44 years, which may be responsible in part for 

the smaller percent of this group who used services compared 

with women younger than 35 years. 

Overall, there is no difference by race or ethnic origin 

in the proportion of non-sterile women who used family planning services at least once during the past 3 years. However, 

there is some variation by socioeconomic characteristics. Evermarried women were more likely than never-married women 

(73 percent) to have used family planning services during 

the past 3 years, as were currently-married compared with 

previously-married women (79 and 77 percent, respectively). 

It is important to note that there is no difference by income 

in the percent who have used services in the past 3 years. 

However, the proportion increases steadily with education 

from 73 percent for women with less than a high school 

education to 79 percent for women with 13 years or more. 

Of the four geographic regions, the lowest percent reporting use of services in the past 3 years is found in the Northeast 

(about 70 percent), and the highest percent in the West 

(81 percent). As suggested in the case of ever-use of family 

planning services, the low proportion of women in the Northeast who report a family planning visit during the last 

3 years is due in part to differences in religious composition. 

In contrast to the 79 percent of Protestants who reported 

a recent visit, only 73 percent of Catholics had a family 

planning visit in the last 3 years. 

Source of services 

About two out of three women visited a private medical 

source at their most recent family planning visit (69 percent 

compared with 30 percent who went to a clinic, table 7). 

With the exception of teenagers, women in every age group 

were most likely to have received services from a private 

medical source at last visit. Furthermore, the percent who 

reported a private doctor as the most recent provider increased 

sharply with age, from 46 percent among teenagers to 84 

percent among women 35-44 years of age. Similarly, the 

percent who received services from a clinic dropped steadily 

with age, from 50 percent among teenagers to 16 percent 

among women aged 35-44. This pattern holds for all women, 

and for black and white women considered separately. 

As in the case of all women, larger percentages of white 

women, overall and in each age group, report a private medical 

service a& their most recent family planning source, but the 

difference is not significant among teenagers. The data suggest 

that black women, however, are more likely to have obtained 

services from a clinic instead of a private medical source 

(52 percent compared with 47 percent). This is primarily 

because such large proportions of young black women report 

a clinic as their most recent source. About 73 percent of 

black teenagers last received services from a clinic. Black 

women aged 25-44 are more likely to have obtained services 

from a private medical source at their last visit (figure 4). 

Nevertheless, black women were twice as likely as white 

women to report a clinic as their most recent source of family 

planning services (52 compared with 26 percent). Furthermore, 

a higher percent of black than white women in every age 

group went to a clinic at their most recent visit. 

Women in the lowest education group were about equally 

likely to have visited a private medical service at their most 

recent visit as they were a clinic (table 8). For the other 

education groups, a larger proportion reported a private medical 

provider than a ciinic as the most recent source of family 

planning services. 

Despite this similarity, there are some sharp differences 

13 
between subgroups in the most recent source, as shown in 

table 8. For example, never-marrried women are more likely 

to have visited a clinic than ever-married women, while a 

greater proportion of currently-married women used a private 

medical service than either formerly- or never-married women. 

Compared with other regions, a significantly higher proportion 

of women in the South most recently had obtained services 

from a clinic. The percent who reported a clinic as the most 

recent source of family planning decreased as income and 

education increased. 

In summary, although there is little variation by race, 

ethnic origin, or socioeconomic characteristics in recent use 

of family planning services overall, there are sizeable differences in the source of those services especially by race, income 

level, and education. 

Changes in source of 

and most recent visit 

services between first 

Although clinics are frequently the first source of family 

planning services for teenagers and for low-income women, 

there is a tendency to shift from clinics to private medical 

sources after the initial visit. This is shown by comparing 

data on first source of family planning services with data 

on most recent source of services for women 15-24 years 

of age (tables 3 and 7). To facilitate that comparison, table 9 contains statistics on most recent source of services 

by first source, by age and race. Overall, 89 percent of women 

who reported a private medical source as their first family 

planning provider also went to a private medical source at 

the most recent visit. Of all women who first visited clinics 

for family planning service, only 72 percent went to a clinic 

for their most recent visit. Most of the remainder reported 

a private medical service as the most recent source (27 percent). 

Clearly, continued preference for the initial source of service 

is greater among those women who start out with a private 

medical source than among those whose initial family planning 

visit is to a clinic, 

Among those 15-19 years of age, the proportion of women 

who reported the same source at most recent visit as that 

at initial visit does not differ by provider type (88 percent 

of those whose first source was a private medical service, 

and 84 percent of those who initially went to a clinic). 

Nevertheless, in some instances the first and the most recent 

family planning visits are one and the same, and this is most 

likely to be true in the case of teenagers. In addition, to 

the extent that women substitute private medical sources for 

less expensive public-sector clinics as social and economic 

circumstances improve, teenagers have experienced a shorter 

time period during which such changes could occur. 

The shift toward private medical sources is clear for 

women aged 20-24. Only 1 I percent of women aged 20-24 

who reported a private medical service as their first family 

planning source went to a clinic for their most recent visit. 

This is much lower than the perent who switched from a 

clinic to a private medical source (33 percent). White women 

also were more likely to change from clinics to private medical 

sources than to switch from a private medical service to a 

clinic (31 and 11 percent, respectively). On the other hand, 

black women were equally likely to shift from a clinic to 

a private source as they were to switch from a private source 

to a clinic. 

Services used 

The categories for type of services received at last family 

planning visit are similar to those at first family planning 

visit. In both cases, medical services and advice or counseling 

are the major categories, but for most recent visit, an additional 

category has been added for visits to renew or to continue 

a birth control method. This category was not applicable for 

services received at the first visit. 

Women were less likely to receive counseling and more 

likely to receive medical services at the most recent visit 

than at the first visit, which is seen clearly when tables 5 

and 10 are compared. At the most recent visit, about threefourths of women reported receiving medical services (76 

percent), but fewer than half received advice or counseling 

(47 percent). Further, for all of the groups shown in tables 10 and 11, the percent who received medical services 

was higher than the percent who received advice or counseling, 

with the exception of black women aged 35-44 years. 

Overall and for white and black women separately, a 

larger percent of women continued a method of birth control 

than began a new method at their most recent visit (3 I percent 

compared with 20 percent for all women). Among teenagers 

and women aged 3544, however, the percents who continued 

a method or began a new method were similar. This is also 

the case when white and black women are considered separately. We have already noted that for many teenagers, the 

most recent visit may be their first visit, so it is not surprising 

that as large a percent begin as renew a method. Among 

older women, it is likely that the reason for the similarity 

in the percents beginning a new method and renewing an 

old method is that many women aged 35-44 obtain a sterilization as a means of preventing further births. The distribution 

of services according to selected characteristics in table 1 I 

also show that with only two exceptions, women in most 

subgroups were more likely to continue than to begin a method 

of birth control at their most recent visit. 

As was true for services received at first visit, there 

are some noteworthy differences between groups in the percent 

who reported receiving particular services at the most recent 

visit. The types of services received varied little by race, 

but there were some significant differences at the youngest 

age groups (table IO). White teenagers were more likely than 

black teenagers to have begun a birth control method at their 

most recent visit (32 and 19 percent, respectively). As a 

result, larger percents of white women aged 15-2!4 years 

and 15-l 9 years received medical services at their most recent 

visit compared with black women. 

Among never-married women, both the percent who began 

a method and the percent who continued a method were higher 

than those for currently-married women. Significantly smaller 

percents of low-income and less-educated women continued 

a method at their most recent visit, compared with women 
with higher incomes and those with at least 12 years of education. However, there were no significant differences by income 

or education in the percent who began a method of birth 

control at their most recent visit. 

Source of payment for services 

Data presented thus far on the source of family planning 

services (tables 3, 4, 7, and 8) have shown that teenagers, 

black women, never-married women, and those in the lowest 

income and education groups often were more likely to use 

clinics than private medical services. On the other hand, 

women who were age 20 and older, currently married, white, 

with high income and with at least a high school education 

were more likely to obtain family planning services from 

private medical sources. 

Many of these differences by age, race, and background 

characteristics also are found when source of payment for 

the most recent family planning visit is examined. In general, 

the data on source of payment (tables 12 and 13) show that 

groups of women who tend to visit clinics for family planning 

services are more likely to have paid for the visit through 

Medicaid, other governmental sources, or “Other” sources 

including no payment, than were women who obtained family 

planning services from private doctors. (Because respondents 

were permitted to report more than one source of payment, 

percents for particular groups may add to more than 100.) 

For example, women 15-24 years of age were more likely 

to have reported Medicaid, other government, or “Other” 

as the source of payment for the most recent family planning 

visit, and less likely to report private medical insurance as 

the source, compared with women aged 25 and over (table 12). The age differential is sharper still if the sources 

of payments for teenagers alone are compared with the percents 

for women aged 25-44. 

The general pattern by age also is found for both white 

women and black women, although not all of the differences 

are statistically significant. On the other hand, as shown in 

table 12, much larger percents of black women than white 

women reported Medicaid and other government as the sources 

of payment (21 versus 4 and 17 compared with 7 percent). 

Furthermore, the percents of white women who reported self, 

family, friend (67 percent), or insurance (34 percent) as the 

source of payment for family planning exceeded the percents 

of black women who reported those sources of payment (44 

percent by self, family, or friends, and 23 percent by 

insurance). 

The sharpest distinctions in source of payment for services 

in table 13 are those by income and education. Much larger 

percentages of women in the lowest income or education 

groups reported Medicaid or other government sources and 

smaller percentages reported medical insurance or self, family, 

or friends as the source of payment for their most recent 

family planning visit, compared with the percents reported 

by high-income women or by women with at least a high 

school education. For example, 18 percent of low-income 

women and only 3 percent of high-income women reported 

using Medicaid to pay for their last visit. 

Payment sources also differ by marital status (table 13). 

About 43 percent of currently-married women reported medical 

insurance as the source of payment, compared with only 17 

percent of never-married women. Both never-married and formerly-married women were more likely than currently-married 

women to have had the expenses for the most recent family 

planning visit covered by Medicaid or other government 

sources. 

The correspondence between source of family planning 

services and source of payment is also reflected in a crossclassification of these two variables, shown in table 12. Of 

those women whose most fecent family planning source was 

a private medical service, about 70 percent reported self, 

family, or friends as a payment source compared with 49 

percent among women who most recently obtained services 

from a clinic. In addition, about 15 percent of women who 

obtained services from a clinic reported Medicaid as the source 

of payment, and 19 percent reported other government sources. 

Of women who obtained their services from a private medical 

service, only 3 percent reported that payment was made by 

Medicaid or other government sources. 

To the extent that black women, poor women, those 

with less education, and teenagers depend on Medicaid, it 

is not surprising that they obtain family planning services 

from clinics. A recent survey of private physicians in specialties relevant to reproductive health care found that only 50 

percent offer contraceptive services to Medicaid patients, and 

only 15 percent offer services at reduced fees for poor women 

who are not eligible for Medicaid.26 Thus, among the poor, 

access to reproductive health care in the private sector is 

severely limited. Publicly funded clinics, including those supported under Title X, for many women are the only available 

source of family planning service. 

15 
Visits in the last 12 months 

Percents of women using services in the last 12 months 

or 3 years do not necessarily reveal the frequency of family 

planning visits. In order to measure these “visit rates,” data 

also were collected on the number of family planning visits 

in the past 12 months to private doctors, clinics, and 

counselors. 

Overall, women used family planning services at the rate 

of about one visit per woman per year (1,078 visits per 1,000 

women). Teenagers had the highest annual visit rate (1,581 

per 1,000) of any age group for all sources of family planning 

services combined (table 14). Visit rates declined sharply 

with age, from 1,447 at 15-24 years to 482 at ages 35-44. 

Similar declines with age were found in the visit rates for 

white and black women separately. 

The annual visit rate for black women (1,337 per 1,000 

women) was significantly higher than the rate for white women 

(1,034). Visit rates for black women also were higher than 

those for white women within each age group (although for 

ages 35-44 the difference is not significant). The highest 

overall visit rate was for black teenagers (1,867 per 1,000 

women). 

Visit rates to all sources were higher among never-married 

women and women in the lowest income category, compared 

with ever-married women and those with higher incomes (table 15). The visit rate was lower in the Northeast than in 

the other three regions. Although the visit rate for Catholics 

was not significantly lower than that for Protestants, the lower 

visit rate in the Northeast may be due in part to the higher 

proportion of Catholics in that region, in combination with 

the lower proportion using the pill in the Northeast.‘* There 

were no significant differences in the visit rates to all sources 

by Hispanic origin or education, or between metropolitan 

and non-metropolitan places of residence. 

Differences in family planning visit rates by age, race, 

marital status, and income reflect different patterns of contraceptive use by these groups. For example, the leading 

method among young and never-married women is the oral 

contraceptive pil1,27 which requires repeated visits to a doctor 

or clinic to renew the prescription and check for side effects. 

As shown in table C, women who were currently using the 

pill had the highest annual visit rate of all contraceptive method 

groups-l ,891 visits per 1,000 women. Visit rates for the 

diaphragm (1,317) and IUD (1,058) were also higher than 

the visit rates for women using methods which do not require 

medical intervention. Sterilization, the leading method among 

older married women, requires few visits over a short period 

Table C. Number of women 1544 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date of interview and 

number of family planning visits in the last 12 months per 1,009 women, 

by current contraceptive method: United states, 1992 

Current method used 

All women’ . . . , . . . . . . . . 

Female sterilization . . . . . . . . 

Male sterilization . . . . . . . 

Pill 

IUD’ : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 

Diaphragm _ . . . . . . . . . _ 

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

Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ever had intercourse and was 

not sterile 3 years before 

the date of the interview 

Number in Visits per 

thousands 1,000 women 

37,467 1,078 

2,595 714 

1,396 442 

6,431 1,691 

2,153 1,058 

2,436 1,317 

3,606 545 

3,219 747 

‘Includes women who were pregnant. post partum, seeking pregnancy, non-surgically sterile, 

and other non-wxs at the date of interview. in addition to current users of contraception. 

(in connection with the surgery); women who were contraceptively sterile had an annual visit rate of 714 per 1,000, and 

those who relied on male sterilization visited family planning 

providers at the rate of only 442 visits per 1,000 women. 

Black women using contraception rely more on methods requiring medical services (except the diaphragm) than white women. 

Of black women using contraceptives, about 78 percent use 

one of the more effective methods (the pill, IUD, or sterilization) compared with 67 percent among white women using 

contraceptives.* The visit rate of black women is higher than 

that of white women, partly because black women are more 

likely to use the more effective female methods which require 

more frequent visits (table 14). Nevertheless, even after adjustment for current method, age, marital status, education, income, source of payment, and region of residence, the race 

differential in family planning visit rates persists.** 

Life cycle factors may also influence visit rates by age 

and marital status. Young and never-married women may 

make family planning visits in order to learn about contraceptive methods. They may need a pregnancy test, or they may 

make frequent visits because their family planning needs 

change often if they move in and out of periods of intercourse, 

or if they change sexual partners. 

With respect to the source of services, overall, women 

visited private medical services at a higher rate than clinics 

(657 compared with 385 visits per 1,000 women). However, 

visit rates per 1,000 women by source varied by age, race, 

16 
marital status, income, and education. The visit rates for 

teenagers were 867 to clinics and only 609 to private doctors. 

Visit rates to clinics also were higher than those to private 

doctors among black women, those in the lowest education 

group, and never-married women, although the difference 

by marital status was significant only at the .lO level. For 

example, the clinic visit rate for black women was 756 compared with a visit rate of 557 to private doctors. Visit rates 

for less educated women were 630 and 463 to clinics and 

private doctors, respectively. In contrast, ever-married women 

and women ages 25-44 made the majority of their visits 

to private practitioners. Among all ever-married women, the 

visit rate to private doctors was 712, compared with a rate 

of only 273 to clinics. White women and those who had 

completed at least 12 years of education also had higher 

visit rates to private doctors than to clinics. For example, 

among white women the visit rate to private doctors was 

67 1, and the rate to clinics was only 323. 

Use of ancillary medical setvices 

In addition to services that directly meet their family 

planning needs, during a family planning visit women often 

receive a number of ancillary medical services that are important screening procedures for maintaining reproductive health. 

As shown in tables 16 and 17, over 80 percent of women 

who used family planning services during the past 12 months 

also had had a pap smear, pelvic and breast exams, blood 

pressure test, and urinalysis at a family planning visit. However, only 50 percent of women reportedly had had a test 

for venereal disease. This percent varied little by group. A 

notable exception is race, with 67 percent of black women 

reporting a test for VD compared with only about 47 percent 

of white women (figure 6). Women who live in the South 

also were more likely to have had a VD test than women 

living in other regions (58 compared with 46 or47 percent). 

The underlying reasons for either the low percent who 

report a test for VD or the sharp differences by race and 

region are not known. During a pelvic exam, some women 

may not realize a VD test has been performed, which would 

account for the low percent who report a test. As for the 

difference by race, some evidence suggests that rates of venereal disease are higher among blacks.” However, screening 

for venereal disease also may be better for black women. 

Among women who received services from a clinic, the percent 

who reported a VD test is much greater than among women 

who went to a private medical source (61 compared with 

45 percent), and black women are more likely to have obtained 

services from clinics. The regional difference also may be 

the result of racial composition. About 21 percent of women 

living in the South are black, compared with 11 percent in 

the Northeast and fewer than 10 percent in either the Midwest 

or West regions. While race alone is an important factor, 

the percent of women of both races who had a VD test 

is higher for clinic patients and residents of the South compared 

with women who received services from private doctors and 

who lived in other regions, as shown in table D. 

Tab&D. Percentofwomen154lyearsofagewhousedfamily 

planninOaa~hthehst12ronthswfroreceivedaMteq byrace, 

source of service, and region of residence: United States, 1982 

Source of service and region 

of resi&nce - white Black 

All’ ........................ 46.6 67.1 

Source of service 

Private medical services ............. 42.6 62.9 

Clinics ....................... 57.1 71.0 

Region of residence 

Northeast ..................... 43.7 66.2 

Michwst ...................... 43.9 65.6 

South ....................... 53.5 69.4 

West ....................... 43.3 61 .l 

‘Inciudes pcivale medical smites. cknics. and cmmebrs. 

17 
Use of services for infertility 

Family planning includes infertility services as well as 

services for limiting the number and planning the spacing 

of births. Data are presented in this section on use of medical 

services for infertility by women who had difficulty in conceiving or in caning a pregnancy to term. Statistics include infertility visits made at any time in the past because there were 

too few cases to make statistically reliable estimates of visits 

in the last 12 months or 3 years for the population subgroups 

presented here. 

About 6.6 million, or 14 percent of women 15-44 years 

of age reported that they or their husband had ever used 

infertility services (table 18). If only ever-married women 

are considered, the proportion who had ever used infertility 

services is 18 percent, as reported previously. ’ It is difficult 

to relate these statistics to the population in need of infertility 

services, because the data on fecundity impairments and infertility refer to the date of interview, and the date of the first 

infertility treatment and its efficacy were not asked. However, 

some insight may be gained from table E, which shows the 

percent of currently-married women who have ever received 

infertility services by infertility status. Nearly half of infertile 

couples (45 percent) had sought services, and undoubtedly 

more will do so in the future. About 13 percent of fecund 

women had sought services, which suggests that for many 

the advice or treatment that they sought was successful. 

For all women, a higher proportion of white women reported ever-use of infertility services compared with black 

women (15 and IO percent respectively), shown in table 18. 

The race difference occurs primarily over age 24. Relatively 

small percents of either black or white women under age 

25 had ever used infertility services. The percents of nevermarried, low-income, or less-educated women who reported 

use of services for infertility were significantly lower than 

the percents among ever-married women, those with higher 

incomes, or those with higher educational attainment 

[table 19). 

About two-thirds of all infertility services were advice 

or treatment to facilitate conception, rather than services to 

help prevent miscarriage (table 18). As shown in table F, 

the services most frequently obtained by women were advice 

on the timing of intercourse, general health advice, and drugs 

to induce ovulation. The most frequently reported service 

for husbands was a sperm count. 

The majority of women who had ever used infertility 

services reported a private medical practitioner as the most 

recent source, as shown in tables 20 and 21. This is true 

for all groups except black women 15-24 years of age, but 

the proportion of that group who had ever used infertility 

services is quite small-less than 5 percent. 

Table E. Percent of currently married women 15-44 years of age who 

ever received infertility services, by infertility status and race: United 

states, 1982 

Number of Percent who 

women in ever received 

Infertility status and race thousands services 

Total’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,231 18.2 

Infertility status 

Surgically sterile 

Contraceptive . . , . . . . . . , . . . . . . . 7,862 16.2 

Noncontraceptive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,116 25.5 

Infertile . . . . . , . . . _ . . . . . . . . 2,391 44.6 

Fecund . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,862 13.4 

Race 

White . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _..... 25,195 18.5 

Black . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . 2,130 13.9 

‘Includes while. black, and other races. 

Table F. Number of women 1544 years of age who ever received 

infertility services and percent distribution by specific service received, 

according to race: United States, 1982 

AU 

women2 White Black 

Number in thousands . . . . . . . 6,455 5,656 563 

Percent distribution 

Total _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Drugs to induce ovulation . . . . . 

Treatment or surgery to 

100.0 100.0 100.0 

16.7 17.3 5.9 

open Fallopian tubes . . . . . . . . 

Other surgery . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Other treatment . . _ . . . . . . . . 

Advice on the timing 

3.5 3.4 5.2 

3.9 3.8 3.8 

12.0 13.1 3.9 

8.6 8.1 13.8 

of interccurse . . . . . . . . 

Advice to stop or start 

18.9 19.1 17.9 

contraception . . . . . . . . 3.5 3.5 3.3 

General health advice . . . . . 18.1 17.4 27.6 

Other advice . . . . . . . . . . . 14.9 14.3 18.8 

‘Excludes women who reported that only their husbands had received infertility services. 

%cludes white, black, and other races. 

16 
References 

‘National Center for Health Statistics, M. C. Horn and W. D. Mosher: 

Use of services for family planning and infertility, United States, 

1982. Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics, No. 103. 

DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 85-1250. Public Health Service. Hyattsville, 

Md. Dec. 20,1984. 

‘W. F. Pratt, W. D. Mosher, C. A. Bachrach, and M. C. Horn: 

Understanding US. fertility, findings from the National Survey of 

Family Growth, Cycle III. Popul. Bull. 39(5), Dec. 1984. 

“N. Ryder and C. F. Westoff: Reproduction in the United States, 

1965. Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press, 1971. 

4L. Bumpass and C. F. Westoff: The “perfect contraceptive” population. Science. 169:1177-l 182, Sept. 18,197O. 

5F. S. Jaffe: Toward the reduction of unwanted pregnancy. Science. 

174:119-127,&t. 81971. 

*A. Campbell: The role of family planning in the reduction of poverty. 

1. Marriage Fam. 30(2):236-245, 1968. 

‘U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future: 

Population and the American Future. New York. New American 

Library, 1972. 

‘J. Menken: Teenage childbearing, its medical aspects and implications for the United States population. In U.S. Commission on Population Growth and the American Future Demographic and Social 

Aspects of Population Grobvth. C. F. Westoff and R. Parke, Jr. 

(cds.). Vol. 1. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972. 

pp. 33 I-353. 

“Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970. 

Public Law91-572.91stCongress, S. 2108. December24,1970. 

‘“Alan Guttmachcr Institute: Two decades of United States support 

for family planning. Issues in Brief. 5(l), Jan. 1985. 

“Alan Guttmachcr Institute: A strong national framework for family 

planning services. Issues in BrieJ 5(2), Jan. 1985. 

‘aDepartment of Health, Education and Welfare: A report on family 

planning services and population research. Report to the Congress 

ofthe United States. Dec. 1978. 

“B Nestor and R. B. Gold: Public funding of contraceptive, sterilization, and abortion services. Fam. Pfann. Perspect. 16(3):128-133, 

1982. 

‘“National Center for Health Statistics, C. A. Bachrach, M. C. 

Horn, W. D. Mosher, and I. Shimizu: National Survey of Family 

Growth, Cycle III: sample design, weighting, and variance estimation. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 2, No. 98. DHHS Pub. 

No. (PHS) 85-1372. Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Sept. 1985. 

“National Center for Health Statistics, B. Hudson: Basic data on 

visits to family planning services sites, United States, 1980. Vital 

and Health Statistics. Series 13, No. 68. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 

82-1729. Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government 

Printing Office, July 1982. 

16National Center for Health Statistics, B. Bloom: Basic data on 

women who use family planning clinics, United States, 1980. Vital 

and Health Statistics. Series 13, No. 67. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 

82-1728. Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government 

Printing Office, Sept. 1982. 

“National Center for Health Statistics, B. K. Cypress: Patterns of 

ambulatory care in general and family practice, the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, United States, January 198~December 

1981. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 13, No. 73. DHHS Pub. 

No. (PHS) 83-1734. Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Sept. 1983. 

‘*National Center for Health Statistics, B. K. Cypress: Patterns of 

ambulatory care in obstetrics and gynecology, the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, United States, January 1980-December 

1981. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 13, No. 76. DHHS Pub. 

No. (PHS) 84-1737. Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Feb. 1984. 

19S. 0. Aral and W. Cates, Jr.: The increasing concern with infertility: 

Whynow?JAMA250(17):2327-31,1983. 

z”W. F. Pratt, W. D. Mosher, C. Bachrach, and M. C. Horn: 

Infertility-United States, 1982. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly 

Report. 34(14):197-199. Apr. 12,1985. 

‘IG. E. Hendershot: Family planning services from multiple provider 

types, an assessment for the United States. Stud. Fam. Pfann. 14(89) 

Aug.lSept. 1983.~~. 218-227. 

“National Center for Health Statistics, W. D. Mosher and C. A. 

Bachrach: Contraceptive use, United States, 1982. Vital and Health 

Statistics. Series 23, No. 12. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 86-1988. 

Public Health Service. Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. 

23M. Chamie, et. al.: Factors affecting adolescents’ use of family 

planning clinics. Fam. Pfann. Perspect. 14(3):126139,1982. 

z4L. Zabin and S. Clark, Jr.: Institutional factors affecting teenagers’ 

choice and reasons for delay in attending a family planning clinic. 

Fam. Plann. Perspect. 15( 1):25-29,1983. 

=L. Zabin and S. Clark, Jr.: Why they delay: a study of teenage 

family planning clinic patients. Fam. Pfann. Perspect. 13(5):205- 

217,I981. 

26M. T. Orr and J. D. Forrest: The availability of reproductive 

health services from U.S. private physicians. Fam. Plann. Perspect. 

17(2):63-69, 1985. 

z7National Center for Health Statistics, C. A. Bachrach and W. 

D. Mosher: Use of contraception in the United States, 1982. Advance 

Data From Vital and Health Statistics. No. 102. DHHS Pub. No. 

(PHS) 85-1250. Public Health Service. Hyattsville, Md. Dec. 1984. 

‘*W. D. Mosher and M. C. Horn: Source of service and visit rate 

for family planning services, United States, 1982. Presented at the 

annual meeting of the American Public Health Association. 

Washington, D.C., Nov. 1985. 

19 
‘%‘. D. Mosher and S. Aral: Factors related to infertility in the 

U.S., 196576.Sex. Transm. Dis. 12(3):117-123, July/Sept. 1985. 

30National Center for Health Statistics, D. French: National Survey 

of Family Growth, Cycle I: sample design, estimation procedures, 

and variance estimation. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 2, No. 

76. DHEW Pub. No. (PHS) 78-1350. Public Health Service. 

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Jan. 1978. 

3’National Center for Health Statistics, W. Grady: National Survey 

of Family Growth, Cycle II: sample design, estimation procedures, 

and variance estimation. Vital and Health Statistics. Series 2, No. 

87. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS) 81-1361. Public Health Service. 

Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, Feb. 1981. 

32U.S. Bureau of the Census: Money income and poverty status 

of families and persons in the United States, 1982. Curr. Popul. 

Rep. Series P-60, No. 140. Washington. U.S. Government Printing 

Office, July 1983. table A- I. 

20 
List of detailed tables 

I. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse, percent who ever used family planning services, 

and percent distribution of women who ever used family 

planning services by age at first use, according to race, 

Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1982 . . . . . 

2. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse, percent who ever used family planning 

services, and percent distribution of women who ever used 

family planning services by age at first use, according 

to selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . 

3. Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and ever used family planning services, and 

percent distribution by first source of family planning 

services, according to race, Hispanic origin, and age: 

United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4. Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and ever used family planning services, and 

percent distribution by first source of family planning 

services, according to selected characteristics: United 

States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

5. Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and ever used family planning services, and 

percent who used selected services at the first family planning visit, by race, Hispanic origin, age, and source of 

service: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

6. Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and ever used family planning services, and 

percent who used selected services at the first family planning visit, by selected characteristics: United States, 

1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

7. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date 

of interview, percent and number who used family planning 

services in the last 3 years, and percent distribution by 

most recent source in the last 3 years, according to race, 

Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1982 . . . . 

8. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date 

of interview, percent and number who used family planning 

services in the last 3 years, and percent distribution by 

most recent source of family planning services in the last 

3 years, according to selected characteristics: United States, 

1982 . ..a...................... 

9. Number of women 15-24 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 3 years and percent distribution 

by most recent source of family planning services, according 

to age and first source of family planning services: United 

States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

23 

24 

25 

10. Number of women 15-44 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 3 years and percent who used 

selected services at the latest family planning visit, by 

race, Hispanic origin, source of service, and age: United 

States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

11. Number of women 15-44 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 3 years and percent who used 

selected services at the latest family planning visit, by 

selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . 

12. Number of women 15-44 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 3 years and percent by source 

of payment for the most recent family planning visit, by 

race, Hispanic origin, source of service, and age: United 

States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

13. Number of women 15-44 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 3 years and percent by source 

of payment for the most recent family planning visit, by 

selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . 

26 

27 

14. Number of women l-5-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date 

of interview, and number and rate of family planning visits 

in the last 12 months, by source of service, race, Hispanic 

origin, and age: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . 

15. Number of women 1 S-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date 

of interview, and number and rate of family planning visits 

in the last 12 months, by source of service and selected 

characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . 

28 16. Number of women 12-44 years of age who used family 

planning services in the last 12 months and percent who 

received selected ancillary medical services at a family 

planning visit in the last 12 months, by race, Hispanic 

origin, source, and age: United States, 1982 . . . . . 

17. Number of women 15-44 years of age who used family 

29 

30 

planning services in the last 12 months and percent who 

received selected ancillary medical services at a family 

planning visit in the last 12 months, by selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

18. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and percent who ever used services for infettility, by type of service, race, Hispanic origin, and age: 

United States, I982 . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 

19. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and percent who ever used services for infertility, by type of service and selected characteristics: United 

States. 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

21 
20. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and percent who ever used services for infertility, by most recent source of service, race, Hispanic origin, 

and age: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

2 1. Number of women 1544 years of age who ever had sexual 

intercourse and percent who ever used services for infertility, 

by most recent source of service and selected characteristics: United States, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

22 
Tabla 1. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse, percent who ever used family planning services, and percent 

distributiin of women who ever used famii planning services by age at first use, according to race, Hiiic origin, and age: United states, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the wnterminous United States. Sea appendixes for discussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling vadabilii. 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic Ever had Ever used family 

origin, and age intercourse planning services Total 

Age at first use of family planning services 

17 years 19-19 20-24 25-29 

or less years years years 

30 years 

or more 

All women’ 

15-44 years ............. 

15-24 years ............. 

15-19 years ............ 

25-34 years ............. 

35-44 years ............. 

Number in thousands Percent 

48,864 39,290 84.2 

13,547 11,342 83.7 

4,467 3,489 77.7 

19,118 17,414 91 .l 

14,019 10,534 75.1 

100.0 25.5 

100.0 51 .o 

100.0 77.8 

100.0 19.7 

100.0 7.7 

Percent distribution 

28.0 33.1 

30.7 18.3 

22.2 

32.2 36.0 

18.0 44.3 

9.2 4.3 

10.4 1.7 

17.0 13.0 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ............. 

15-24 years ............. 

15-19 years ............ 

25-34 years ............. 

35-44 years ............. 

39,031 28.8 

10,992 

3,512 

16,084 

11,954 

32,915 84.3 100.0 23.8 

9,094 82.7 100.0 48.6 

2,885 76.5 100.0 76.8 

14,758 91.8 100.0 18.8 

9,083 75.8 100.0 7.3 

32.0 

23.4 

33.0 

18.8 

34.1 9.3 

19.4 

4.1 

38.4 10.5 “1.5 

44.9 18.8 12.4 

Black 

X-44 years ............. 8,263 5,329 85.1 100.0 37.4 

15-24 years ............. 2,207 1,981 88.9 1 oil.0 63.8 

15-19 years ............ 835 898 83.4 100.0 83.2 

25-34 years ............. 2,448 2,197 89.8 100.0 27.8 

3544 years ............. 1,810 1,171 72.7 100.0 11.4 

24.4 

24.2 

18.8 

29.8 

14.8 

27.4 8.8 

12.2 

4.2 

32.7 7.7 ‘2.1 

43.1 15.8 15.2 

Ori9in 

Hispanic 

15-44 years ............. 3,713 2,995 80.7 100.0 25.1 18.3 37.4 12.1 l 7.1 

15-29 years ............. 1,988 1,644 83.8 100.0 39.2 25.3 28.7 ‘8.9 

30-44 years ............. 1,747 1,351 77.3 100.0 l 8.1 ‘9.7 47.9 18.8 15.7 

Non-Hispanic 

15-44 years ............. 42,970 38,295 84.5 100.0 25.5 28.8 32.8 8.9 4.0 

15-29 years ............. 21,510 18,979 88.2 100.0 40.5 33.8 22.4 3.3 

W-44 years ............. 21,481 17,318 80.7 100.0 9.1 23.3 44.1 15.0 8.4 

‘Includes whiie, black, and other races. 

23 

. 
Table 2. Number of women X-44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse, percent who ever used family planning services, and percent 

distribution of women who ever used family planning services by age at first use, according to selected characteristics: United States, 1982 

[Statislios are based on a sample of the noninstitutionelized population of the oontenninous Umted States. See appendixes for discussion of fhe sample design, estimates of samplfng vsriabiliiy. 

and deffnftions of terms] 

Characteristic 

Ever had Ever used tamily 

intercourse planning services Total 

Age at first use of family planning services 

17 years 18-19 20-24 25-29 

or less years years years 

30 years 

or more 

Total’ ................. 

Marital status 

Never married. ............ 

Currently married ........... 

Widowed, divorced, or separated . . 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .......... 

150 percent or more ......... 

300 percent or more ........ 

Education 

Less than 12 years .......... 

12 years. ............... 

13 years or more ........... 

Religion 

Protestant ............... 

Catholic ................ 

Geographic region 

Northeast ............... 

Midwest ................ 

South ................. 

West ................. 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan .............. 

Nonmetropolitan ........... 

Number in thousands 

46,684 39,290 

11,749 9,306 

28,231 24,296 

6,704 5,687 

11,931 9,962 

34,753 29,328 

20,386 17,190 

9,668 7,680 

18,557 15,470 

18,459 16,140 

27,458 23,638 

14,395 11,455 

9,873 7,764 

12,009 10,251 

15,220 12,937 

9.581 8,338 

37,100 31,318 

9,584 7,972 

84.2 

79.2 

86.1 

84.8 

83.5 

84.4 

84.3 

79.4 

83.4 

87.4 

86.1 

79.6 

78.6 

85.4 

85.0 

87.0 

84.4 

83.2 

Percent distribution 

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 

25.5 28.0 33.1 9.2 4.3 

43.2 30.2 21.6 3.0 l 1.7 

19.1 27.5 37.5 10.9 5.0 

23.8 26.4 32.7 11.8 5.2 

36.3 29.5 24.1 6.8 3.3 

21.8 27.5 36.2 9.9 4.6 

19.1 26.2 39.3 10.8 4.6 

49.1 19.6 19.3 6.8 5.2 

25.9 30.2 31 .I 8.6 4.2 

13.9 29.6 41.6 10.9 3.8 

27.3 29.7 30.8 8.2 

21.3 23.5 39.1 11.1 

20.6 21 .o 38.9 12.3 

24.1 29.8 33.8 8.9 

29.0 30.7 28.8 7.8 

26.4 28.0 33.6 8.6 

24.6 27.9 33.7 9.8 

29.0 28.3 30.7 6.5 

4.0 

5.0 

7.3 

3.4 

3.7 

3.3 

4.0 

5.5 

‘Includes Protestant, Catholic, other religions, and no religion 

24 
T-3. Nunberofwomen1~4ybwtof~whoeverhrdrexuaintsrcowta sndeverwedfml8ypbnningservke~andpercentdisMbutionbyflrst 

rwrcbof~~nningMnriosr,rcccHdingtonce,Hkpmicarigkr,~~:U~~1982 

[Statistb are based on a sample of the noninsttution~ed populatbn of the ccmterminws United States. See appendiies for diiion of the sample design. estimates of sampling variabilii. 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic ori& and am3 

Ever had 

intercoum3 

and used 

services 

AH 

scums 

Fmt some of servkes 

Private 

medical 

tiWViC%S ClinIca 

All women’ thousands 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,342 

15-19 years . . . , . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,469 

20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,673 

109.0 

196.0 

100.0 

Percent distribution 

49.0 48.4 

41.7 63.4 

52.3 46.2 

2.6 

‘4.8 

l 1.6 

Race 

White 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,084 106.0 54.0 43.3 2.7 

15-19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,665 100.0 45.7 48.9 ‘5.3 

20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,409 109.0 57.5 40.9 l l .6 

Black 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,961 IfxLO 27.0 70.9 ‘2.1 

15-19 years _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 696 100.0 24.9 71.6 ‘3.5 

20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,265 100.0 28.2 70.4 ‘1.4 

Origin 

Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 794 100.0 49.1 48.6 ‘2.4 

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,547 160.0 49.0 48.4 2.6 

Number in 

h2lude.s white. Mack, and other races. 

25 
Table 4. Number of women 1524 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and ever used family planning services, and percent distribution by first 

source of family planning services, according to selected characteristics: United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the conterminous Unlted States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of temls] 

Characteristic 

Total’ . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ever had 

intercourse 

and used 

services 

Number in 

thousands 

11,342 

All 

sources 

100.0 

First source of services 

Private 

medical 

services Clinics 

Percent distribution 

49.0 48.4 

Counselors 

2.6 

Marital status 

Never married. . . . . . . . . . . . 8,154 100.0 40.8 55.4 3.8 

Currently married . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,458 100.0 60.4 38.5 ‘I .o 

Widowed, divorced, or separated . . . . . . 729 100.0 49.0 49.7 -1.4 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less . . . . . , . . . . . . 4,435 100.0 41.2 56.6 l 2.2 

150 percent or more . . . . . . . . 6,907 100.0 54.1 43.1 l 2.8 

300 percent or more . . . . . . _ . . 3,680 100.0 56.5 41.6 l 1 .9 

Less than 12 years .................. 3,228 100.0 40.1 57.0 ‘2.9 

12 years. ....................... 4,776 100.0 54.5 43.4 l 2.1 

13 years or more ................... 3,338 100.0 49.9 47.3 ‘2.8 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 

Catholic ........................ 

Geographic region 

6,741 100.0 48.0 49.3 *2.7 

3,426 100.0 55.8 41.7 *2.6 

Northeast ....................... 

Midwest ........................ 

South ......................... 

West ......................... 

2,032 100.0 49.2 48.6 *2.2 

3,137 100.0 55.3 41.6 ‘3.0 

3,821 100.0 46.7 50.4 ‘2.9 

2,353 100.0 44.4 53.9 ‘1.7 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan . . . . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . 

Nonmetropolitan . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . 

8,978 100.0 48.5 48.9 2.6 

2,363 100.0 51.2 46.5 l 2.3 

‘Includes Protestant, Catholic, other religions, and no religion. 

26 
Table 5. Number of women Xi-24 years of age who ever had sexud intercourse and ever used fan#y planning services, and percent who used selected 

services at the first family planning visit, by race, Hispanic orfgin, age, and source of senrice: United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the contermiwws Untted States. See appendixes for diiussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Services used at first visit 

Race, Hispanic o&in, source, and age 

All women3 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

15-19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . 

20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Ever had 

intercourse 

and used 

services 

Number in 

thousands 

11,342 

3,469 

7,873 

Msdical services Advice or counseling 

Begin birth Birth control 

All medical control All advice advice or 

services’ method or counseling2 counseling 

Percent 

66.7 39.7 66.2 55.5 

62.0 32.4 69.8 55.7 

68.8 43.0 64.7 55.5 

Race 

White 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

15-19 years . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . 

20-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

9,094 68.3 41 .o 66.6 55.6 

2,685 63.1 33.3 70.7 55.9 

6,409 70.5 44.2 64.8 55.4 

15-24 years ..................... 1,961 60.2 34.7 65.2 55.2 

15-19 years ..................... 696 57.0 29.7 66.0 53.6 

20-24 years ..................... 1,265 82.0 37.4 64.8 56.1 

Origin 

Hispanic . . . _ . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . 

Non-Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

794 71.4 35.5 52.2 43.5 

10,547 66.4 40.1 67.3 56.4 

Private medical services ............... 

Clinics ......................... 

Counselors ...................... 

5,562 69.6 42.9 64.0 57.6 

5.489 67.4 38.7 66.7 53.5 

291 100.0 54.0 

‘Includes birth control services and other medical services related to family planning. 

%cludes birth control advice or counseling and other counseling related to family planning. 

%cludes v&de. bla&, and other races. 

27 

, 
Table 6. Number of women 15-24 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and ever used family planning services, and percent who used selected 

services at the first family planning visit, by selected characteristics: United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstiitionalized population of the contemtinous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design. estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Services used at first visit 

Characteristic 

Ever had 

intercourse 

and used 

services 

Medical services Advice or wunsefing 

Begin birth Birth wntrol 

All medical control All advice advice or 

services’ method or wunselina2 counselina 

Total3 ......................... 11,342 66.7 39.7 66.2 56.5 

Marital status 

Never manfed. .................... 6,154 65.2 40.1 72.1 59.9 

Currently married ................... 4,458 69.1 39.2 58.5 50.1 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .......... 729 65.6 40.3 63.9 51.8 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .................. 4,435 65.9 31.1 61.2 49.3 

150 percent or more ................. 6,907 67.2 45.3 69.5 59.5 

300 percent or more ................ 3,680 64.9 45.3 73.1 63.2 

Education 

Less than 12 years .................. 3,228 64.8 27.1 66.6 47.9 

12 years. ....................... 4,776 67.4 40.7 65.3 55.9 

13 years or more ................... 3.336 67.6 50.6 73.0 62.4 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 6,741 85.1 41.3 66.4 56.3 

Catholic ........................ 3,426 68.3 36.6 65.7 54.7 

Geographic region 

Northeast ....................... 2,032 69.3 32.7 64.0 52.5 

Midwest ........................ 3,137 72.8 47.7 64.5 54.1 

South ......................... 3,821 62.1 38.2 65.9 56.5 

West ......................... 2,353 63.9 37.8 71 .o 58.4 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan ...................... 8,978 66.4 39.9 68.4 57.0 

Nonmetropolitan ................... 2,363 67.8 39.0 58.0 49.9 

Number in 

Percent 

‘Includes birth control services and other medical se&es related to family planning. 

*Includes birth control advice or counseling and other counseling related to family planning. 

slncludes Protestant, Catholic, other religions. and no religion. 

28 
Table 7. Number of women lCbI4 years of age who ever had sexud in- ar~Iwerenot~ter%e3yeafsbehxethedateoftntenrtew,perce1ttand 

number who used famify planning services in the last 3 years, and percent dktdbution by most recent 

Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1982 

8ourceintheM3yearr,acwrdingtorace, 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the conterminous United States. Sea appendixes for discussion of the sample des.Qn, estimates of sampkg variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Ever had 

intercourse and 

not sterile 

Used family planning .sefvices in the last 3 years 

Most recent source 

Race, Hispanic origin, and age 

3 years before 

the date of 

interview 

All 

sources 

Private 

madlcal 

services Clinics Counselors 

All women’ Percent Percent distribution 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

15-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-U years ..................... 

37,467 76.9 

13,455 81.7 

4,465 77.0 

16,664 82.6 

7,349 55.3 

100.0 69.3 29.5 1.3 

100.0 57.5 40.5 ‘1.9 

100.0 46.1 50.2 ‘3.7 

100.0 74.3 24.7 ‘1.1 

100.0 84.0 16.0 ‘0.1 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

15-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-44 years ..................... 

31,089 77.0 100.0 

loo.0 

100.0 

100.0 

loo.0 

73.1 

10,915 80.9 

3,512 75.9 

14.026 82.9 

6,149 58.4 

62.7 

51.9 

77.1 

86.4 

25.6 1.3 

35.5 ‘1.9 

44.0 ‘4.1 

21.7 l 1 .2 

13.6 

Black 

15-44 years ..................... 5,267 

15-24 years ..................... 2,192 

15-19 years ..................... 833 

25-34 years ..................... 2,125 

3544 years ..................... 949 

76.6 

85.7 

82.4 

80.5 

47.2 

100.0 

100.0 

loo.0 

100.0 

loo.0 

46.5 

33.6 

24.2 

55.1 

67.5 

52.0 ‘1.5 

63.8 ‘2.6 

73.1 ‘2.7 

44.4 l 0.5 

32.0 ‘0.5 

Origin 

Hispanic 

1544 years ..................... 

15-29 years ..................... 

3044 years ..................... 

3,252 74.6 loo.0 61 .O 37.9 l 1.1 

1,945 79.3 100.0 61 .Q 37.4 ‘0.7 

1,308 67.5 loo.0 59.5 38.7 ‘1.9 

Non-Hispanic 

15-U years ..................... 34,215 77.1 loo.0 70.0 28.7 1.3 

15-29 years ..................... 20,907 84.1 loo.0 63.3 35.0 1.7 

30-44 years ..................... 13,308 66.3 loo.0 83.5 16.1 l 0.4 

Number in 

‘Includes whtie, black, and other races. 

29 
Table 8. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date of interview, percent and 

number who used family planning services in the last 3 years, and percent distribution by most recent source of family planning services in the last 3 

years, according to selected characteristics: United States, 1992 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionaltred population of the mntarminous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the SSmpb3 design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and defimtions of terms] 

Ever had 

intercourse and 

not sterile 

Used family planning services in the last 3 years 

Most recent source 

Characteristic 

3 years before 

the date of 

interview 

All 

souroas 

Private 

medical 

services Clinks C0unselots 

Number in 

Percent Percent distribution 

Total’ ......................... 37,467 76.9 100.0 69.3 29.5 1.3 

Marital status 

Never married. .................... 11,528 72.6 100.0 50.5 47.0 2.5 

Currently married ................... 20,774 79.1 100.0 79.0 20.6 0.4 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .......... 5,i 65 77.3 100.0 68.9 29.2 1.9 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .................. 10,179 77.6 100.0 51.7 46.2 2.1 

150 percent or more ................. 27,280 76.7 100.0 75.9 23.2 0.9 

300 percent or more ................ 15.648 76.5 100.0 79.0 20.0 1.0 

Education 

Less than 12 years .................. 7,845 73.1 100.0 48.7 49.2 2.1 

12 years. ....................... 14,164 76.3 100.0 73.0 25.7 1.2 

13 years or more ................... 15,458 79.4 100.0 75.6 23.5 0.9 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 21,022 78.7 100.0 68.8 29.8 1.4 

Catholic ........................ 12.313 72.8 100.0 71.8 26.9 1.3 

Geographic region 

Northeast ....................... 8,412 69.7 100.0 70.8 27.3 1.9 

Midwest ........................ 9,494 79.0 100.0 72.8 26.2 1.1 

South ......................... 11,968 77.8 100.0 63.7 35.3 1.0 

West ......................... 7,593 61 .o 100.0 72.0 26.7 1.3 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan ...................... 29,865 76.7 100.0 70.0 28.6 1.4 

Nonmetropolitan ................... 7,602 77.7 100.0 66.4 32.8 0.7 

‘Includes Protestant, Catholic, other religions, and no religion. 

30 
Tabte9. Numbcrofw~n15-24ycPrrofagcwhouladfrnlypbnninO~nioerin~~~l~percsntdirtrbutionbymaatnrcentrouceof 

famiiy p&inning sewiaxq acuxdtng to age and ftrst source offamaypfannlngrenricer: 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized populatin of Uw cMltenninous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design, eslimates of sampling variability, 

and definili~s of terms] 

Most recent swrce of services 

Age and first soum 

used s-s 

in last 

3 years 

All 

SOllrCeS 

Private 

medicsrl 

SeWi#S ClScs Counseio~ 

All women’ 

Number in 

thousands Percent distribution 

All sources ...................... 10,995 loo.0 57.5 40.5 ‘1.9 

Private medical services ............... 5,403 100.0 88.6 11.1 l 0.3 

Clinics ......................... 5,314 100.0 26.9 71.5 ‘1.5 

Counselors ...................... 278 100.0 l 39.3 ‘20.2 ‘40.5 

Age 

15-19 years 

All sources ...................... 3,439 100.0 46.1 50.2 ‘3.7 

Private medical services ............... 1,437 100.0 87.6 ‘11.9 ‘0.5 

Clinics ......................... 1,834 100.0 15.3 83.6 ‘1 .I 

Counselors ...................... 168 100.0 l 26.8 ‘13.7 l 59.5 

2C-24 years 

All sources ...................... 7,556 100.0 62.8 36.1 ‘1 .l 

Private medical services ............... 3,966 100.0 89.0 10.8 ‘0.3 

Clinics ......................... 3,480 loo.0 33.1 65.2 91.7 

Counselors ...................... 110 100.0 ‘58.5 Y30.1 l 11.4 

Race 

White 

All sources ...................... 

Private medical services ............... 

Qinics ......................... 

Counselors ...................... 

8,830 

4,767 

3,830 

233 

100.0 62.7 35.5 ‘1.9 

100.0 89.1 10.5 l 0.4 

100.0 31 .o 67.5 ‘1.5 

100.0 l 4S.1 ‘18.6 ‘38.3 

Black 

Ail sources ...................... 1,878 100.0 33.6 63.8 ‘2.6 

Private medical services ............... 514 100.0 04.1 15.9 

Clinics ......................... 1,323 100.0 14.7 83.4 l 1 .9 

Counselors ...................... 42 100.0 ‘14.7 ‘30.2 l 55.1 

‘Includes wbiie. black, and other rac8s. 

31 
Table 10. Number of women 1544 years of age who used family planning services in the last 3 years and percent who used selected services at the 

latest famity planning visit, by race, Hispanic origin, source of service, and age: United States, 1982 

[Stabstics are based on a sample of the noninsbtutionalized population of the contsrminous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design. estimates of sampling varfability. 

and definitions of terms] 

Services used at latest visit 

Race, HispanIc origin, source, and age 

All women3 

15-44 years . . . . . . 

15-24 years . . . . . . . . . . . 

16-19 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

2544 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

35-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Used services 

in last 

3 years 

Number In 

thousands 

28,820 

10,995 

3,439 

13,763 

4,062 

Medkai services Advice or counseling 

All’ Birth control All2 Birth control 

medical Begin Continue advice or advice or 

services method method counseling counseling 

Percent 

75.9 19.7 30.6 47.0 31.6 

82.5 23.2 33.3 42.8 35.8 

78.0 30.4 25.9 49.3 43.0 

73.6 18.2 32.1 47.8 29.7 

65.5 15.3 1 a.3 55.9 2’7.3 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

15-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-44 years ..................... 

Black 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

15-19 years .................... 

25-34years ................. , ... 

35-44 years ..................... 

Origin 

Hispanic 

15-44 years . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . 2,426 76.4 16.5 25.4 43.1 31.4 

15-29 years . . . . . . . . . . 1,543 78.6 16.9 28.5 40.6 33.6 

30-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . 883 72.6 ‘16.0 l 20.1 47.6 27.6 

23,925 76.6 19.8 31.3 47.1 31.7 

8,830 84.3 23.8 34.4 42.5 35.7 

2,665 80.1 32.3 26.9 49.8 43.6 

11,624 73.8 18.4 32.6 48.1 30.2 

3,470 66.3 14.6 19.4 55.4 26.6 

4,037 73.4 18.4 29.9 47.4 32.1 

1,878 73.7 19.8 30.4 47.3 38.1 

686 69.1 19.2 24.3 49.5 42.5 

1,711 76.3 16.7 33.1 43.7 25.0 

448 61 .l 19.2 15.5 62.3 34.1 

Non-Hispanic 

15-44 years ..................... 26,394 75.8 20.0 31.1 47.4 31.7 

15-29 years ..................... 17,577 80.1 22.1 34.0 44.6 34.0 

30-44 years ..................... 8,818 67.2 15.8 25.2 52.9 27.0 

Source 

Private medical services ............... 19,962 76.7 20.0 32.3 47.2 31.5 

Clinics ......................... 8,497 77.1 19.8 27.8 44.5 31.7 

Counselors ...................... 361 ......... 100.0 l 38.1 

‘Includes birth control services and other medical services related to family planning. 

‘Includes birth control advice or counseling and other counseling related to family planning. 

slncludes white, black, and other races. 

32 
Tabkll. Numberofwomenl~yearsofagewhousedfemilyplannkrgsenriaainthelart3yearrandpercentwhowed+dected~at#le 

latest family plsnning visit, by selected characterisks: United States, 1982 

[Statisks are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the contenninous United States. See appendixes for diiussion of the sample design. estimates of sampling vari&$ty, 

and defiiibons of terms] 

services used 

Characteristic 

Used services 

in last 

3 years 

All’ 

medical 

seNices 

Medical services 

Birth control 

Begin Continue 

method method 

AdvIce or counseling 

A112 Birth control 

advice or edvice or 

ciwnsekg counse fing 

Number in 

Total3 ......................... 28,820 75.9 19.7 

Percent 

30.6 47.0 31.6 

Marital status 

Never married. .................... 8,395 79.2 23.6 36.1 49.1 41.8 

Currently married ................... 16,431 75.7 17.5 27.8 44.2 26.7 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .......... 3,994 69.5 20.4 30.6 54.5 30.8 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .................. 7,900 73.6 19.3 23.9 48.3 32.2 

150 percent or more ................. 20,920 76.7 19.8 33.1 46.6 31.4 

300 percent or more ................ 11,964 78.6 19.8 35.7 44.7 31.2 

Education 

Lessthanl2years .................. 5,738 71.8 19.1 20.4 49.5 32.5 

12 years. ....................... 10,804 75.0 19.8 33.3 47.4 30.3 

13 years or more ................... 12,278 78.5 19.9 33.0 45.5 32.4 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 16,541 74.6 18.2 30.9 46.7 29.7 

Catholic ........................ 8,967 76.8 20.9 30.2 47.6 34.5 

Geographic region 

Northeast ....................... 

Midwest ........................ 

South ......................... 

West ......................... 

5,868 76.6 17.1 28.2 46.0 31.7 

7,496 74.8 20.4 34.3 47.8 30.8 

9,309 76.3 20.9 31.8 46.9 31.7 

6.148 75.8 19.5 26.7 47.3 32.4 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan ...................... 22,913 76.1 20.0 30.8 47.4 32.5 

Nonmetropolitan ................... 5,907 75.1 18.4 29.9 45.7 28.2 

‘Includes birth control SBrvices and other medical services related to famfiy planning. 

Zlncludes birth control advice or counseling and other counselmg related to famliy planning. 

%ludes Protestant. Catholic, other religions, and no religion. 
Table 12. Number of women 1544 years of age who used family planning services in the last 3 years and percent by source of payment for the most 

recent family planning visit, by race, Hispanic origin, source of service, and age: United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the conterminous Untied States. See appendixes for discuwon of the sample design, estimates of sampling variabMy, 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic origin, source, and age 

Used services 

in last 

3 years 

Self, family 

or friends 

Sources of payment for the latest visit 

Medical Other 

insurance Medicaid Government 

Other 

or no 

payment 

All women’ 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years .................... 

15-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-44 years ..................... 

Number in 

thousands 

26,820 

10,995 

3,439 

13,763 

4,062 

63.4 32.9 

61 .l 20.4 

56.9 11.0 

65.6 39.3 

62.5 45.4 

Percent2 

6.6 

9.8 

13.6 

5.3 

2.4 

8.1 3.6 

11.0 6.5 

13.3 9.6 

6.8 1.9 

‘5.4 V.2 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

16-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-44 years ..................... 

23,925 67.2 34.2 4.2 

8,830 65.4 22.1 5.9 

2,665 62.3 11.8 9.3 

11,624 69.1 39.6 3.6 

3,470 85.4 46.6 “1.5 

6.5 3.7 

9.2 7.0 

10.4 10.5 

5.3 ‘1.9 

l 3.4 “1.3 

Black 

1544 years ..................... 

15-24 years ..................... 

16-19 years .................... 

25-34 years ..................... 

35-44 years ..................... 

4,037 43.5 22.8 21.2 

1,878 40.7 11.1 29.0 

686 36.4 l 6.8 30.8 

1,711 45.7 33.1 15.4 

448 47.4 32.8 ‘10.8 

16.8 2.6 

18.6 3.8 

22.7 ‘5.6 

14.7 “1.8 

17.1 l 0.3 

Origin 

Hispanic 

1544 years ..................... 2,426 62.9 27.0 11.4 9.3 l 2.6 

15-29 years ..................... 1,543 61.6 23.9 ‘12.3 l 1 0.5 ‘2.9 

3044 years ..................... 883 65.1 32.4 ‘9.7 l 7.3 l 2.0 

Non-Hispanic 

15-44 years ..................... 26,394 63.5 33.5 6.2 8.0 3.7 

15-29 years ..................... 17,577 63.0 27.8 7.9 9.0 5.0 

30-44 years ..................... 8,818 64.4 44.8 2.8 5.9 ‘1.1 

Source 

Private medical services ............... 

Clinics ......................... 

Counselor ....................... 

19,962 69.9 46.8 3.0 3.3 1.3 

8,497 49.4 15.7 14.6 19.3 7.7 

361 l 34.4 ‘5.1 ‘20.5 ‘10.0 ‘34.9 

‘Includes white, black, and other races. 

‘Percents may add to more than 100 because some women reported more than one source of payment. 

34 
Table 13. Number of women 15-M years of age who used fam.ily planning services in the last 3 years and percent by source of payment for the most 

recent family planning visit, by selected charact~ United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninsfiifnalized population of he conterminous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample desgn, estimates of sampling vanabhty. 

and definitions of terms] 

Characteristic 

Used services 

in last 

3 years 

Se/r family 

or friends 

Sources of payment for the most recent visit 

Medicel Other 

insurance Medicaid government 

Other 

or no 

payment 

Total’ ......................... 26.820 63.4 32.9 6.6 8.1 3.6 

Marital status 

Never married. .................... 8,395 61.4 17.3 13.1 10.0 6.4 

Currently married ................... 16,431 66.0 42.7 1.8 5.9 2.4 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .......... 3.994 57.3 25.6 12.7 13.4 ‘2.4 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .................. 7.900 50.3 16.5 17.6 16.0 6.6 

150 percent or more ................. 20,920 68.4 39.1 2.5 5.1 2.4 

300 percent or more ................ 11,964 69.8 41.3 ‘1.7 3.4 2.7 

Education 

Less than 12 years .................. 5,738 46.3 19.3 16.7 17.6 5.3 

12 years. ....................... 10,604 66.4 32.5 5.9 7.7 2.3 

13 years or more ................... 12,278 67.8 39.7 2.5 4.0 3.9 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 16,541 61 .I 32.2 6.9 9.7 3.7 

Catholic ........................ 8.967 66.7 34.3 5.9 5.0 3.4 

Geographic region 

Northeast ....................... 5,868 62.0 39.0 6.1 ‘3.5 5.0 

Midwest ........................ 7,496 62.4 36.3 5.4 6.1 3.2 

South ......................... 9,309 66.7 23.5 8.1 10.9 3.8 

West ......................... 6,148 61 .O 37.2 6.3 10.6 ‘2.3 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan ...................... 22,193 63.3 33.8 6.7 8.0 3.7 

Nonmetropolitan ................... 5,907 63.8 29.6 6.2 8.5 l 3.2 

Number in 

‘Includes Protestar& Catholic, other religions, and no religion. 

*Percents may add to more than 100 because some women reported more than one scums of payment. 

35 
TaMa 14. Number of women 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and were not sterile 3 years before the date of interview, and number 

and rate of family planning visits in the last 12 months, by source of service, race, Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1982 

[Slstisttt are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the oonterminous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Ever had 

intercourse and 

not sterile Number of Source of service 

Race. Hispanic origin, and age 

3 years before fami/y planning 

the date of visits in the 

interview last 12 months 

AM 

sources 

Private 

medical 

services Clinics Counselors 

All women’ 

16-44 years ........... 

15-24 years ........... 

15-19 years .......... 

25-34 years ........... 

35-44 years ........... 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ........... 

15-24 years ........... 

16-19 years .......... 

25-34 years ........... 

35-M years ........... 

15-44 years ........... 

15-24 years ........... 

15-19 years .......... 

25-M years ........... 

35-44 years ........... 

Origin 

Hispanic 

15-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . 

15-29 years . . . . . . . . . . 

30-4 years . . . . . . . . . . 

Non-Hispanic 

1544 years . . . _ . . . . . . 

15-29 years . . . . _ . . _ . . . 

30-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . 

. . 

37,467 40,384 

13,455 19,465 

4,465 7,059 

16,664 17,374 

7,349 3,545 

31,089 32,140 1,034 671 323 39 

10,915 15,194 1,392 738 573 81 

3,512 5,352 1,524 661 736 127 

14,026 14,036 1,001 748 232 *21 

6,149 2,909 473 377 88 *8 

5,267 7,039 1,337 557 756 l 24 

2,192 3,791 1,729 530 1,162 l 37 

833 1,555 1,867 451 1,387 ‘29 

2,125 2,671 1,257 633 605 ‘19 

949 577 608 448 154 “6 

3,252 3.941 1,212 673 524 “15 

1,945 2,756 1,417 809 582 “26 

1,308 1,186 907 470 437 

34,215 36,443 1,065 656 372 38 

20,907 27,490 1,315 732 529 53 

13,306 8,953 673 535 123 ‘14 

1,078 

1,447 

1,561 

1,043 

482 

Visits per 1,000 women 

657 385 

702 673 

609 667 

743 279 

380 96 

- 

36 

71 

105 

‘21 

‘7 

‘Irioludes white, black, and other races. 

36 
Table 15. Number of women 1544 years of sge who ever had se& intercourse and were not s&rite 3 years before the date of interview, and number 

and rate of family pianning vi&s in the last 12 months, by source of service and selected cs United States, 1982 

[Statislios are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the mnterrninous United States. See ap(wndixes for discussion of the sample design. esrimates of samplq variabilii. 

and definitions of terms] 

Characteristic 

Ever had 

intercourse and 

not sterile 

3 years before 

the date of 

interview 

Number of 

family planning 

visits in the 

last 12 months 

All 

sources 

Source of service 

Private 

medical 

services Clinics Counselors 

Total’ ......................... 

Marital status 

Number in thousands 

37,467 40,384 1.078 

Visits per 1,000 women 

657 385 36 

Never married. .................... 11,528 14,143 1,227 534 636 l 56 

Currently married ................... 20,774 21,227 1,022 743 251 28 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .......... 5,165 5,014 971 585 360 ‘26 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less .................. 10,179 12,638 1.242 549 636 ‘55 

150 percent or more ................. 27,286 27,746 1,017 697 290 29 

300 percent or more ................ 15,648 16,022 1,024 747 242 35 

Education 

Less than 12 years .................. 7,845 8,854 1,129 463 630 ‘35 

12 years. ....................... 14,164 14,996 1,059 666 354 39 

13yearsormore ................... 15,458 16,534 1,070 747 288 34 

Religion 

Protestant ....................... 21,022 23.401 1,113 678 395 40 

Catholic ........................ 12,313 12,296 999 632 326 ‘41 

Geographic region 

Northeast ....................... 8,412 7,512 893 540 312 l 41 

Midwest ........................ 9,494 10.094 I.063 669 363 32 

South ......................... 11,966 13,762 1,150 655 463 32 

West ......................... 7,593 9,017 1,186 775 369 44 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan ...................... 

Nonmetropolitan ................... 

29,865 32,580 1,091 663 367 40 

7,602 7.804 1,027 633 374 ‘20 

‘Includes Protestant, Catholic, olhar religions, and no religion. 

37 
Table 16. Number of watnen 16-M years of age who used famity planning services in the last 12 months and percent who received se&ted anciNary 

fnadkal services at a family planning visit in the last 12 months, by race, Hispanic otigin, source, and age: Unitad Sates, 1962 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstfbAionalized population of the oonteninous United Slates. See appendixes for discussion 01 the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic origin, 

source, and age 

Used services 

in last 

72 months Total 

pap 

smear 

Ancillary medical services 

Blood 

Pelvic Breast pressure 

exam exam test Urinalysis 

Venereal 

disease 

test 

All women’ 

15-44 years ............. 

15-24 years ............. 

15-19 years ............ 

25-34 years ............. 

35-44 years ............. 

Number in 

thousands 

19,762 

8,886 

2,915 

6,900 

1,975 

97.4 92.2 92.1 

97.0 90.8 89.0 

95.7 83.3 83.7 

98.1 93.3 94.7 

96.4 93.2 94.4 

Percent 

89.8 

87.7 

82.0 

91.4 

92.5 

94.6 83.9 50.0 

93.2 82.6 52.5 

91.9 82.9 49.9 

96.0 85.0 48.4 

94.6 84.5 45.8 

Race 

White 

15-44 years ............. 

15-24 years ............. 

15-19 years ............ 

25-34 years ............. 

35-M years ............. 

16,224 97.3 92.0 92.4 89.8 94.4 82.6 46.6 

7,101 96.9 90.5 89.1 87.7 92.7 81.5 49.2 

2,236 95.6 82.1 83.0 82.1 91.9 82.6 46.2 

7,435 97.9 93.2 95.2 91.2 96.0 83.4 45.2 

1,687 96.2 93.3 94.3 92.5 94.7 83.6 41.9 

Black 

15-44 years ............. 

15-24 years ............. 

15-19 years ............ 

25-34 years ............. 

35-44 years ............. 

3,001 97.8 92.6 90.1 68.8 94.9 89.6 67.1 

1,572 96.9 90.6 86.9 86.3 94.2 87.9 66.8 

614 95.4 85.8 84.5 81 .I 90.9 82.3 64.1 

1,195 99.1 95.6 93.7 91.7 96.3 92.2 67.0 

234 96.8 91.2 93.2 91.4 92.4 87.4 69.9 

Origin 

Hispanic 

15-44 years ............. 1,690 96.3 88.6 89.6 84.0 93.6 85.3 49.6 

15-29 years ............. 1,202 97.9 89.0 91.3 86.9 95.0 86.7 52.5 

30-44 years ............. 468 92.2 87.5 85.5 76.9 90.0 81.7 42.6 

Non-Hispanic 

15-44 years ............. 18,072 97.5 92.5 92.3 90.4 94.7 83.8 50.0 

IS29 years ............. 13,406 97.2 92.0 90.8 89.3 93.8 82.7 50.4 

30-44 years ............. 4,666 98.5 93.9 96.7 93.4 97.2 87.0 48.9 

Most recent source* 

Private medical sewices ....... 

Clinics ................. 

Counselors .............. 

13,372 98.6 94.1 95.2 92.4 95.6 63.4 45.1 

6,140 95.7 89.1 87.2 86.0 93.0 85.7 60.5 

250 79.0 61.5 48.0 45.8 67.9 64.5 52.6 

‘Inckales tiite, blab, and other rsoes. 

%I necessarily the s0urca that provided the pzutioulsr ancillary service. ff the respondent used more thsn one source in the last 12 months. 
Teble 17. Number of women 1544 yeus of age who used fmiiy pbming aervices in the hst 12 months and percent who received selected ancillary 

medlcd~satafamlyplrnnklgvkiththelart12~bysdected~rclcteriaict:UnitedStste~l1982 

[Stat~ktks are based on a sample of the noninstitutionaliied popi~laticm of the conterminous United States. See qqadixes br discussion of the sample design. estimates of sampling variability, 

and deflnttkns of terms] 

Characteristic 

used services 

in last 

12 months Total 

pep 

SlTh3X 

Ancikuy medical services 

Blow’ 

Pelvic Breast pressure 

exam exam test Udnalysk 

Venereal 

disease 

test 

Number in 

thousands 

19,782 97.4 92.2 92.1 

Percent 

Total’ ................. 89.8 94.8 83.9 50.0 

Marital status 

Never married. ............ 8,589 97.0 

Currently married ........... 10,711 98.0 

Wiiowed, divorced, or separated . . 2,482 96.3 

90.3 

93.1 

93.2 

88.5 86.4 92.5 82.1 54.2 

94.4 92.0 98.1 84.9 48.3 

91.7 89.4 93.5 84.4 54.7 

Poverty level income 

149percentcrless .......... 

15Opercentormore ......... 

3OOpercentormore ........ 

Education 

5,533 98.5 90.7 90.4 87.4 94.5 88.3 54.8 

14,229 97.8 92.7 92.8 90.8 94.8 83.0 48.1 

8.280 98.7 94.8 94.2 92.3 95.5 84.8 47.8 

Less than 12 years .......... 3,982 95.8 88.4 85.5 80.9 89.9 84.5 51.5 

12 years. ............... 7,405 97.8 93.2 93.0 91.3 95.9 85.8 50.8 

13yearsormore ........... 8,396 98.1 93.9 94.4 92.8 95.7 82.1 48.8 

Religion 

Pretestant ............... 11,314 97.8 91.9 91.2 89.5 95.1 84.3 51 .I 

Catholic ................ 8,101 96.3 91.8 92.5 89.0 93.5 83.7 48.7 

Geographic region 

Northeast ............... 3,797 96.7 92.8 92.8 91.8 94.7 82.5 48.8 

Midwest. ................ 5,168 98.0 90.7 91 .I 87.4 92.8 82.5 48.4 

south ................. 8,573 98.0 92.0 91.7 90.8 95.7 86.3 57.7 

West ................. 4,224 99.0 93.8 93.5 90.0 95.3 83.1 45.5 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan .............. 15,787 98.1 93.1 92.8 90.9 95.5 84.2 50.9 

Nonmetropolitan ........... 3,995 94.9 88.3 89.2 85.5 91.2 82.8 48.8 

‘Indudes Protestant, Catholic. odw mliikns. and no religion. 

39 
Table 18. Number of women 1544 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and percent who ever used services for infertilii, by type! of service, 

race, Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1882 

[Statistics are based on a sample 01 the noninstitutionalized population of the contenninous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic origin, and age 

Number in 

thousands All lvpes 

Type of infettilhy service 

Advice or Advice or 

treatment to treatment to 

conceive avoid miscarriage 

15-44years . . . . . 

15-24years . . . . 

15-19years . . 

25-34 years . . 

35-44 years . . . 

l-years . . . . . 

15-24years . . . . . 

15-19 years . . . . 

25-34 years . . . . . 

35-44 years . . . . . 

15-44years . . . . . 

15-24years . . . . . 

15-19years _ . . . 

25i34years . . . . . 

35-44years . . . . . 

1544years . . . . . 

15-29years . . . . . 

30-44years . . . . . 

15-44years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,970 14.4 11.0 3.4 

15-29years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,510 9.2 8.8 2.5 

30-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,481 19.8 15.3 4.3 

All women’ 

...................... 48,884 

...................... 13,547 

...................... 4,487 

...................... 19,118 

...................... 14,019 

Race 

White 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Origin 

Hispanic 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Non-Hispanic 

39,031 

10,992 

3,512 

18,084 

11,954 

8,283 

2,207 

835 

2,448 

1,810 

3,713 11.9 9.7 ‘2.2 

1,988 ‘9.3 *7.4 ‘7.9 

1,747 14.8 12.3 ‘2.5 

Percent 

14.2 10.9 3.3 

5.4 3.7 1.7 

l 2.0 l 0.8 ‘1.2 

18.8 13.4 3.2 

19.5 14.5 4.9 

14.9 11.8 3.4 

5.5 3.8 l 1.7 

l 2.1 ‘0.7 l 1.4 

17.0 13.9 3.1 

20.8 15.8 5.2 

9.8 8.8 :2.9 

4.8 ‘2.8 v L. 2 

‘1.8 ‘1.2 l 0.8 

12.7 9.1 8.5 

11.3 8.4 “2.9 

‘Includes white, blab, and other races. 

40 
T-19. Numberot womsn15-44ysrnof~whoever~~xurJintercounaurd~whoaverwed 

end 8elected chmcteh* United State% 1982 

servlcesfor-klfertitity,bytypeofsewim 

[Statistii am based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of tha conterminws United Statas. See appandiias for discussion of the sample design. estimates of sampling variability. 

and delinittons ol tens] 

Tvpe of infertlity service 

Charactetistic 

Number in 

thousands All tvws 

Advice or Advice or 

treatment to treatment to 

conceive avoid miscam’aae 

Percent 

Total’. ................................ 

Marital status 

Never married ............................. 

Currently married ........................... 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .................. 

Poverty level income 

149percentortess .......................... 

15Qpercentormore ......................... 

306percentormore ......................... 

Education 

Lessthsn12years .......................... 

12years ................................ 

13yearsormore ........................... 

Religion 

Protestant ............................... 

Catholic ................................ 

Geographic region 

Northeast ............................... 

Midwest ................................ 

South ................................. 

West ................................. 

Place of residence 

Metropolitan. ............................. 

Ncnmetrop&an ........................... 

48,684 14.2 10.9 3.3 

11,749 2.7 l 1 .5 l 1.1 

28,231 18.2 14.5 3.7 

6,764 17.7 12.4 5.3 

11,931 10.4 7.3 3.2 

34,753 15.5 12.2 3.3 

20.388 18.4 13.2 3.2 

9,668 9.2 7.1 ‘2.1 

18,557 14.7 11.4 3.3 

18,459 18.4 12.4 3.9 

27,458 14.4 to.7 3.7 

14,395 14.7 11.8 2.9 

9,873 13.5 11.1 2.4 

12,909 15.9 11.8 4.1 

15,220 14.3 10.5 3.7 

9,581 12.7 10.2 2.5 

37,109 14.3 10.7 3.8 

9,584 14.0 11.7 ‘2.3 

‘Indudes Protestant, cathok, other raiiis. and no ratigbn. 

41 
Table 20. Number of women 1544 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and percent who ever used services for infertli, by moat recent 

source of service, race, Hispanic origin, and age: United States, 1982 

[Statistics are based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the oonterminous United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design, estimates of sampling variability, 

and definitions of terms] 

Race, Hispanic origin, and age 

Number in 

thousands Total 

Private 

medical 

services Clinics 

15-44 years . . 

15-24 years . . 

15-19years . 

25-34 years . . 

35-44 years . . 

15-44years 

Race 

White 

...................... 39,031 14.9 12.7 2.3 

15-24 years . ...................... 10,992 5.5 3.8 *I.8 

15-l 9 years ...................... 3,512 l 2.1 ‘1.3 ‘10.8 

26-34 years ...................... 18,084 17.0 14.5 2.5 

35-44 years . ...................... 11,954 20.8 18.3 2.5 

15-44 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,263 9.6 6.0 3.5 

15-24 years ...................... 2,207 4.8 Y.9 l ‘> Q IL. 

15-19 years ...................... 835 ‘1.8 ‘0.9 ‘0.9 

25-34 years ...................... 2,448 12.7 7.3 !5.4 

3544 years ...................... 1,610 11.3 9.8 “1.8 

1544 years . . 

15-29 years . . 

30-44 years . . 

All women’ 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Black 

Origin 

Hispanic 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

Non-Hispanic 

...................... 

...................... 

...................... 

48,684 14.2 11.7 2.8 

13,547 5.4 3.5 1 .Q 

4,467 ‘2.0 “1.2 ‘0.8 

19,118 16.8 13.5 3.1 

14,019 19.5 17.0 2.5 

3,713 11.9 8.8 l 3.2 

1,968 ‘9.3 ‘5.9 ‘3.5 

1,747 14.8 12.0 ‘2.8 

15-44years 

15-29 years . 

30-44 years . . 

‘Includes white, black, and other races. 

42,970 14.4 11.9 2.5 

21,510 9.2 7.1 2.2 

21,481 19.8 18.8 2.8 

42 
Tabk 21. Nuder of womfm 15-44 years of age who ever had sexual intercourse and percent who e-r used services for inferWhy, by most recent 

source cf servke and selected characteristic% United States, 1982 

[Statistics am based on a sample of the noninstitutionalized population of the contarmincus United States. See appendixes for discussion of the sample design. estimates of sampting variabilii. 

and definitions oi tens] 

Most recent source of service 

Characteristic 

Number in 

thousands Total 

Private 

medical 

servkes 

Percent 

Clinics 

Total’ ................................. 

Marital status 

46,684 14.2 11.7 2.6 

Never married. ............................ 11,749 2.7 ‘1.9 ‘0.8 

Currently married ........................... 28,231 18.2 15.5 2.7 

Widowed, divorced, or separated .................. 6,704 17.7 12.5 5.2 

Poverty level income 

149 percent or less. ......................... 

150 percent or more ......................... 

300 percent or more ......................... 

Education 

11,931 10.4 7.5 2.9 

34,753 15.5 13.1 2.4 

20,386 18.4 14.2 2.2 

Less than 12 years .......................... 9,668 9.2 6.4 2.6 

12 years. ............................... 18,557 14.7 11.8 2.9 

13yeanormore ........................... 18,459 16.4 14.3 2.1 

Religion 

Protestant ............................... 

Catholic ................................ 

27,458 14.4 11.7 2.7 

14,395 14.7 12.2 2.5 

Geographic region 

Northeast ............................... 9,873 13.5 11.8 ‘1.8 

Midwest ................................ 12,009 15.9 13.1 2.8 

South ................................. 15,220 14.3 11.6 2.6 

West ................................. 9,561 12.7 9.8 3.0 

Place of residence 

Metropoiiian .............................. 37,100 14.3 11.7 2.6 

Nonmetropolitan ........................... 9,564 14.0 11.5 2.5 

‘Includes Protestant, Catholic, other reli#ons, and no religion. 

4.3 
Appendixes 

Contents 

I. Technical notes .................................................. 

Background ................................................... 

Statistical design ................................................ 

Measurement process .............................................. 

Data reduction ................................................. 

Reliability of estimates ............................................. 

Estimation of standard errors ..................................... ,, ... 

Testing differences .............................................. 

Nonsampling error ............................................... 

Interview nonresponse ............................................ 

Item nonresponse .............................................. 

II. Definitions of terms ................................................ 

Demographic terms ............................................... 

III. Section E of the Under 25 questionnaire ...................................... 

List of appendix tables 

I. Estimates of parameters A and B for relative standard error curves, by type of statistic, marital status, and race . . . 

II. Approximate relative standard errors and standard errors for estimated number of women of all races combined: 

1982 National Survey of Family Growth . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , . 

III. Approximate standard errors for estimated percents expressed in percentage points, for women of all races: 1982 

National Survey of Family Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

45 

45 

45 

46 

46 

46 

46 

47 

48 

48 

48 

50 

50 

52 

47 

47 

47 

44 
Appendix I. 

Technical notes 

Background 

This report is one of a series based on the National Survey 

of Family Growth (NSFG) conducted by the National Center 

for Health Statistics (NCHS). The NSFG was designed to 

provide data on fertility, family planning, and aspects of maternal and child health that are closely related to childbearing. 

The NSFG is a periodic survey based on personal interviews with a nationwide sample of women. The NSFG has 

been conducted three times, in 1973, 1976, and 1982. The 

present report is based on Cycle III of NSFG. A detailed 

report on Cycle III is contained in “National Survey of Family 

Growth, Cycle III: Sample Design, Weighting, and Estimation 

Procedures,” Series 2, Vital and Health Statistics. I4 A detailed 

description of the methods and procedures used in Cycle I 

can be found in “National Survey of Family Growth, Cycle I: Sample Design, Estimation Procedures, and Variance 

Estimation,” Series 2, No. 76, of Vital and Health Statistics.30 

A detailed description of methods and procedures of Cycle II can be found in “National Survey of Family Growth, 

Cycle II: Sample Design, Estimation Procedures, and Variance 

Estimation,” Series 2, No. 87 of Vital and Health Sruristics.“’ 

This appendix presents a summary of the more important 

technical aspects of the 1982 NSFG. 

Fieldwork for Cycle III was carried out under a contract 

with NCHS by Westat, Inc., between August of 1982 and 

February of 1983. For the first time, the sample represented 

all women 15-44 years of age, regardless of marital status, 

including never-married women, in the noninstitutionalized 

population of the conterminous United States. Women living 

in group quarters, such as college dormitories, were included 

in Cycle III. Interviews were conducted with 7,969 women; 

3,201 were black, 4,577 were white, and 191 were of other 

races. 

Interviews were conducted by trained female interviewers 

in respondents’ homes and lasted an average of one hour. 

The interview focused on a woman’s pregnancy history, her 

use of contraceptives in each pregnancy interval, her physical 

ability to bear children, her expectations of bearing children 

in the future, her use of family planning and infertility services, 

her marital history, labor force participation, and a wide range 

of social, economic, and demographic characteristics. 

Statistical design 

The NSFG is based on a multistage area probability sample. Black households and households with resident teenage 

women were sampled at higher rates than other households 

so that reliable estimates of statistics could be presented separately for black and teenage women. In addition, the sample 

was designed to provide tabulations for each of the four major 

geographic regions of the United States. 

The first stage of the sample design consisted of drawing 

a sample of primary sampling units (PSU’s). A PSU consisted 

of a county, a small group of contiguous counties, or a standard 

metropolitan statistical area as defined by the U.S. Bureau 

of the Census in 1970. The second and third stages of sampling 

were used to select several segments (clusters of 15 to about 

60 dwelling units) within each PSU. A systematic sample 

of dwelling units was then selected from each segment. Each 

sample dwelling unit was visited by an interviewer who listed 

all household members. The interviewer then consulted a computer-generated sampling table to determine which women, 

if any, should be interviewed. 

The statistics in this report are estimates for the national 

population and were computed by multiplying each sample 

case by the number of women she represented in the population. The multipliers, or final weights, ranged from under 

500 to over 50,000 and averaged about 7,000. They were 

derived by using three basic steps: 

0 Inflation by the reciprocal of the probability of selection.- 

The probability of selection is the product of the probabilities of selection of the PSU. segment, household, 

and sample person within the household. 

0 Nonresponse adjustment.-The weighted estimates were 

ratio adjusted for nonresponse by a multiplication of two 

factors. The first factor adjusted for nonresponse to the 

screener by imputing the characteristics of women in responding households to women in nonresponding households in the same PSU and stratum. The second factor 

adjusted for nonresponse to the interview by imputing 

the characteristics of responding women to nonresponding 

women in the same age-race-marital status category and 

PSU. Response to the screener was 95.1 percent: the 

response to the interview was 83.5 percent, yielding a 

combined response rate of approximately 79.4 percent. 

l Poststratification by marital status, age, and race.-The 

estimates were ratio adjusted within each of 24 age-racemarital status categories to independent estimates of the 

population of women 15-44 years of age. The independent 

estimates were derived from U.S. Bureau of the Census 

Current Population Surveys. 

NOTE: A list of references follows the text. 

45 
The effect of the ratio-estimating process was to make 

the sample more closely representative of the noninstitutionalized population of women 1524 years of age in 

the conterminous United States. The final poststratification 

reduced the sample variance of the estimates for most statistics. 

All figures were individually rounded; aggregate figures 

(numbers) were rounded to the nearest thousand. Aggregate 

numbers and percents may not sum to the total because of 

the rounding. 

Measurement process 

Field operations for Cycle III were carried out by Westat, 

Inc., under contract with NCHS; these operations included 

pretesting the interview schedule, selecting the sample, interviewing respondents, and performing specified quality control 

checks. Interviewers, all of whom were female, were trained 

for 1 week prior to field work. The first five interview schedules 

done by each interviewer were reviewed; after a high level 

of quality was achived by an interviewer, this review was 

reduced to a sample of questionnaires, unless an unacceptable 

level of error was found. A IO-percent sample of respondents 

was recontacted by telephone to verify that the interview 

had taken place and that certain key items were accurately 

recorded. 

A portion of the interview schedule applicable to this 

report is reproduced in appendix III. Two forms of the questionnaire were used, one for women 15-24 years of age, and 

one for women 2544 years of age. The questionnaire for 

women 15-24 years of age included a few additional items 

that referred to early experiences that women over 25 could 

not be expected to remember accurately. 

Data reduction 

The responses of each woman to the interview questions 

were translated into predetermined numerical codes, and these 

code numbers were recorded on computer tapes. The first 

few questionnaires coded by each coder were checked completely; after an acceptable level of quality was reached, verification of coding was performed on a systematic sample of 

each coder’s questionnaires. The data were edited by computer 

to identify inconsistencies between responses, as well as code 

numbers that were not allowed in the coding scheme; these 

errors were corrected. 

Missing data on all variables used in this report were 

imputed in order to provide consistent national estimates. 

(To speed release of the public use computer tape, however, 

not all variables on the computer tape were imputed.) If the 

level of missing data is relatively high (more than 5 percent), 

this fact is noted in the “Definitions of terms.” Only two 

items are so affected: poverty level income, and age (or date) 

of first intercourse. 

Reliability of estimates 

Because the statistics presented in this report are based 

on a sample, they may differ somewhat from the figures 

that would have been obtained if a complete census had been 

taken using the same questionnaires, instructions, interviewing 

personnel, and field procedures. This chance difference between sample results and a complete count is referred to 

as sampling error. 

Sampling error is measured by a statistic called the standard error of estimate. The chances are about 68 out of 

100 that an estimate from the sample will differ from a complete 

count by less than the standard error. The chances are about 

95 out of 100 that the difference between the sample estimate 

and a complete count will be less than twice the standard 

error. The relative standard error of an estimate is obtained 

by dividing the standard error of the estimate by the estimate 

itself, and is expressed as a percent of the estimate. Numbers 

and percents that have a relative standard error that is more 

than 30 percent are considered unreliable. These figures are 

marked with an asterisk to caution the user, but may be 

combined to make other types of comparisons of greater 

reliability. 

Estimation of standard errors 

Because of the complex multistage design of the NSFG 

sample, conventional formulas for calculating sampling errors 

are inapplicable. Standard errors were, therefore, estimated 

empirically by using a technique known as balanced half-sample replication, This technique produces highly reliable, unbiased estimates of sampling errors. Its application to the 

NSFG has been described elsewhere.30*31 

Because it would be prohibitively expensive to estimate, 

and cumbersome to publish, a standard error for each percent 

or other statistic by this technique, standard errors were computed for selected statistics and population subgroups that 

were chosen to represent a wide variety of demographic characteristics and a wide variation in the size of the estimates 

themselves. Curves were then fitted to the relative standard 

error estimates (ratio of the standard error to the estimate 

itself) for numbers of women according to the model 

RSE(N’) = (A + BIN’)“* 

where N’ is the number of women and A and B are the 

parameters whose estimates determine the shape of the curve. 

Separate curves were fitted for women of all races combined 

and white women, and for black women, because a different 

sampling rate was used for black women. Separate curves 

were fitted for teenagers for the same reason. The estimates 

of A and B are shown in table I. 

To calculate the estimated standard error or relative standard error of an aggregate or percent, the appropriate estimates 

of A and B are used in the equations: 

RSE,, = (A + B/N’)“* 

SEN, = (A + B/N’)“*(N) 

RSEp, = (BP l (100 - P’)/X’ )I’* 

SEP, = (B x P’ l (100 - P’)/X’)“2 

NOTE: A list of references follows the text. 

46 
where N’ = number of women 

P’ = percent 

X’ = number of women in the denominator of the 

percent 

SE = standarderror 

RSE = relative standard error 

Tables II and III show some illustrative standard errors 

of aggregates and percents of women of all races from Cycle III of the NSFG. 

TableI. Estim8tesofpwametcrsAandBforreMvestandarde~ curver,byfypeof~maritdststus,andnCe 

Type of statist& 

marital status, and race 

Women aged 15-44 years by 

marital status and race 

Parameter 

A 

Parameter 

B 

All races and white: 

All marital statuses . . . . . . . . . -0.0003935957 21306.413351 

Ever married . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . -0.0010973290 39809.167683 

Never married . . . . . . . . . . . . . -0.0009351043 17608.863330 

Blacks 

All marital statuses; ever married; 

never married . . . . . . . . . . . . . -0.0009086323 

Women aged 15-I 9 years 

6346.048380 

All races and white . . . . . . . . . . . . - 0.001456493 13862.104404 

Black . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 0.603322383 4727.056926 

Table II. Approximate rdafive sfmdard errors and stmxkwd errors for 

esfheted nmber of women of all races combined: 1982 fkfional Survey 

of FunEy Growth 

Size of estimate 

Relative 

standard error Standard error 

50,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65.2 =.%~ 

100.000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46.1 46,000 

500,ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.5 102,000 

1,000,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.5 144,060 

3,006,OOO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 245,000 

5,000,OOO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 310,600 

7800,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 359,000 

1o,wo,ooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 418,006 

30,090,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 532,000 

Testing differences 

The standard error of a difference between two comparative statistics, such as the proportion surgically sterile among 

white couples compared with black couples, is approximately 

the square root of the sum of the squares of the standard 

errors of the statistics considered separately, or calculated 

by the formula, if 

d = P’, - P’, 

then 

S, = 1/(P’,)* l ( RSEp,,)2 + U”2)2 l ( RSEp.)* 

where P’, is the estimated percent for one group and P’, 

is the estimated percent for the other group, and RSEP,,and 

RSEp,, are the relative standard errors of P’, and Pr2, respectively. This formula will represent the actual standard error 

quite accurately for the difference between separate and uncorrelated characteristics although it is only a rough approximation 

in most other cases. 

A difference among comparable proportions or other statistics from two or more subgroups is considered to be statistically 

significant when a difference of that size or larger would 

be expected by chance in less than 5 percent of repeated 

samples of the same size and type, if no true difference 

existed in the populations sampled. Such a difference would 

be statistically significant at the 0.05 level. By this criterion, 

if the observed difference or a larger one could be expected 

by chance in more than 5 percent of repeated samples, then 

one cannot be sufficiently confident to conclude that a real 

difference exists between the populations. When an observed 

difference is large enough to be statistically significant, the 

true difference in the population is estimated to lie between 

the observed difference plus or minus 2 standard errors of 

that difference in 95 out of 100 samples. 

Although the 5-percent criterion is conventionally applied, 

it is in a sense arbitrary; depending on the purpose of the 

particular comparison, a different level of significance may 

be more useful. For greater confidence one would test for 

significance at the 0.01 (l-percent) level, but if one can accept 

a IO-percent chance of concluding a difference exists when 

there actually is none in the population, a test of significance 

at the lo-percent level would be appropriate. 

;-Al. Approximate standard errors for esfimated percents expressed in percentage paints, for wornen of al races: 1962 Natbnd Survey of Family 

Estimated percent 

Base of percent 2or98 5or95 lOor 2oor90 30 or 70 4oGr60 50 

1OO,Oc6............................ 6.5 10.1 13.8 18.5 21.2 22.6 23.1 

500$00............................ 2.9 4.5 6.2 8.2 9.5 10.1 10.3 

1600,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 3.2 4.4 5.8 6.7 7.1 7.3 

5,000,Oocl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.9 1.4 2.0 2.6 3.0 3.2 3.3 

10,000,000 . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.3 2.3 

30,000,000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 

!YJ,ooo,ooo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 I .o 

Example of use of table III: If 30 prc8nt of Women in a specik category were using the pill and the base of that percent was 1O,CUYJ,ooO, then the 3Upermnt c&~nn and the 1O.OOD.C0O row 

indffafe that 1 standard error is 2.1 percentage points and 2 standard enors are twice that, or 4.2 psrcentege points. Therefore, tfw chances 818 95 out of 100 fhat the bus percent in tf?e 

populalion was between 25.8 and 34.2 (30.0 percent plus or minus 4.2 percent). This is called a 9!Spsrcsnt ccnttderce interval. In addition. the relative standard error of that 30-percent estimate 

is 2.1 percent dwided by 20 percenl. or 7.0 percmt. 

47 
The term “similar” means that any observed difference 

between two estimates being compared in not statistically 

significant, but terms such as “greater,” “less,” “larger,” and 

“smaller” indicate that the observed differences are statistically 

significant at the 0.05 level, by using a two-tailed t-test with 

39 degrees of freedom. Statements about differences that are 

qualified in some way (e.g., by the phrases “the data suggest” 

or “some evidence”) indicate that the difference is significant 

at the 0.10 level but not the 0.05 level. 

Nonsampling _ error - 

Although sampling error affects the reliability of survey 

estimates, nonsampling error may introduce bias. The results 

of any survey are subject to at least four types of potential 

nonsampling error, including interview nonresponse; nonresponse to individual questions or items within the interview; 

inconsistency of responses to questions; and errors of recording, coding, and keying by survey personnel. 

To minimize nonsampling error, stringent quality control 

procedures were introduced at every stage of the survey including a check on completeness of the household listing; extensive 

training and practice of interviewers; field editing of questionnaires; short verification interviews with a subsample of respondents; verification of coding and editing; an independent 

recode of a sample of questionnaires by NCHS; keypunch 

verification; and an extensive computer “cleaning” to check 

for inconsistent responses, missing data, and invalid codes. 

A detailed description of some of these procedures follows; 

others were previously discussed. 

When a substantial difference observed is found not to 

be statistically significant, one should not conclude that no 

difference exists, but simply that such a difference cannot 

be established with 95-percent confidence from this sample. 

This is especially important in Cycle III because the number 

of ever-married women in the sample is 4,651 in Cycle III, 

compared with 7,970 in Cycle II-a reduction of 42 percent. 

This means that the standard errors in Cycle III are larger 

than in Cycle II, so it is harder to establish significant differences in Cycle III than in Cycle II. Lack of comment in 

the text about any two statistics does not mean that the difference was tested and found not to be significant. 

The number of replicates in the balanced half-sample 

replication design minus one (39 in Cycle III) can reasonably 

be used as an estimate of the number of degrees of freedom, 

although the exact value of the degrees of freedom is unknown. 

Therefore, in this report, differences between sample statistics 

are compared by using a two-tailed t-test with 39 degrees 

of freedom. 

Example: In 1982, 68.8 percent of 25,195,OOO currentlymarried white women were using some method of contraception, compared with 61 .O percent of the 2,130,OOO currentlymarried black women. To test this racial difference at the 

.05 level of significance, compute 

68.8 - 61.0 t= 

V/(68.8)2*RSE2,,,,,, + (61 .0)2*RSE2~~,,0, 

Relative standard errors are computed using the appropriate 

values for L? from table I: 

RsE,,s.s, = J (39809.1677)*(100 - 68.8) 

(68.8)*(25,195,000) 

= 0.027 

“““,,,,,,,, = /E 

= 0.044. 

Thus 

68.8 - 61.0 t= 

d(68.8)2*(O.O27)2 + (61 .0)2*(0.044)2 

= 2.39 

The two-tailed .95 critical value (I-CC) for a I statistic with 

39 degrees of freedom is 2.02. Therefore, the difference is 

significant at the 5 percent level. 

Interview nonresponse 

Interview nonresponse occurs when no part of an interview 

is obtained. It can result from failures at any of three principal 

steps: (1) failing to list all households in sample segments, 

(2) failing to screen all listed households, andl (3) failing 

to interview an eligible woman in each screened1 household. 

A discussion of these steps follows. 

The completeness of listing cannot be tested directly because it requires an independent, accurate enumeration of 

the households that should have been listed. In the NSFG, 

listing completeness and accuracy were tested by the missed 

dwelling unit (DU) procedure at the time of screening: If 

the first structure in a segment was included in the sample, 

the whole segment was checked to see if any structures had 

been missed in the listing process; if the first structure was 

a multiple-DU structure, and if the first-listed unit in the 

building was included in the sample, the entire structure was 

checked for missed DU’s. 

Of the original sample of 34,641 DU’s screened, 3,614 

were found vacant or not DU’s. Of the 31,02!7 occupied 

DU’s, 4.9 percent were not screened successfully. Screening 

was completed in 29,511 households; 9,964 of these contained 

eligible respondents who were selected for interview. Interviews were not completed with 16.5 percent of these cases, 

because of refusals by respondents (8.3 percent) and by the 

parents of respondents under 18 years of age (1.5 percent), 

no contact after repeated calls (2.8 percent), or other problems 

(4.0 percent). 

The nonresponse adjustment for interview nonresponse 

described earlier imputes the characteristics of responding 

women of the same age group, race, marital status, and geographic area to nonresponding women. 

Item nonresponse 

Item nonresponse may have occurred when a respondent 

refused to answer a question or did not know the answer 

40 
to a question, when the question was erroneously not asked 

or the answer was not recorded by the interviewer, or when 

the answer could not be coded. Nonresponse to individual 

questions was very low in Cycle III as it was in Cycle II. 

Some examples of item nonresponse among a total of 7,969 

respondents are: religion of respondent, 11 cases; respondent’s 

occupation, 37 cases. The item with the most item nonresponse 

was family income (from which poverty level income was 

derived), with 1,767 cases. Missing data were imputed for 

all data items in this report. For those few items where the 

proportion of cases imputed was high, this fact is noted in 

the appropriate section of the definitions. 

As with all survey data, responses to the NSFG are subject 

to possible deliberate misreporting by the respondent. Such 

misreporting cannot be detected directly, but can be detected 

indirectly by the extensive computer “cleaning” and editing 

procedures used in the NSFG. 

49 
Appendix II. 

Definitions of terms 

Family planning services--In Cycle III, in order to obtain 

estimates of the extent and types of family planning services, 

women were asked a series of questions about their use of 

specific services. These included: (I) advice or counseling 

for: problems or worries about sexual intercourse, an unwanted 

or mistimed pregnancy, a sterilizing operation, or birth control; 

(2) a check-up or medical test to check for: correct use, 

fit, or position of a birth control method; health problems 

from using a birth control method; or pregnancy; and (3) 

a visit to a doctor or clinic to renew a method of birth control 

the woman was already using or to obtain a new method 

of birth control. Women who reported receiving one or more 

of these services were classified as having used family planning 

services. 

Source of family planning services-Women who had 

received family planning services during the last 3 years and 

in the last 12 months were shown a card containing the following list of types of places: “Clinics” included hospitals, family 

planning clinics, community health centers, public health departments, military health service, and student health service 

clinics; “private medical sources” included private doctors, 

private group practices, co-ops, or privately-owned clinics; 

service providers classified as “counselors” included minister, 

priest, religious counselor, school counselor, family and social 

service agency, and youth center. 

Ancillary medical services-Women who had made at 

least one family planning visit during the 12 months before 

the survey were also asked whether they also had received 

other, related medical services during a family planning visit. 

Those services include: a pap smear, a pelvic exam, a breast 

exam, a blood pressure test, urinalysis, and a test for venereal 

disease. 

Age at first family planning visit-Age at first family 

planning visit was ascertained by the question: “Thinking 

back to the very first time you received any of the family 

planning services on this card, when was that?” Women who 

could not recall the month (or season) and year were asked 

their age at first visit and whether or not it occurred before 

or after the birthday for the given age. Age at first family 

planning visit was calculated from the month (or season) 

and year, if given, or taken from the follow-up questions 

on age. Age was classified according to the woman’s age 

at her last birthday before her first family planning visit. 

Steriliv-For this report, use of family planning services 

in the last 3 years was considered inapplicable if a woman 

was sterile 3 years or more before the interview; that is, 

if she reported it was impossible for her and her husband 

to conceive as a result of an operation, accident, or illness 

that occurred more than 3 years before the interview-before 

January 1979 for Cycle III. All other women were classified 

as able to conceive at the beginning of the period for which 

their use of family planning senrices was reported. 

Infertility services-A woman was classified as having 

used infertility services if she answered either of the following 

questions affirmatively: “Have you (or your husband) ever 

been to a doctor or clinic to talk about ways to help you 

become pregnant?“; or “(Not counting routine care or advice 

about a pregnancy), have you (or your husband) ever been 

to a doctor or clinic to talk about ways to help you prevent 

a miscarriage?’ Such women may not be currently infertile; 

for example, if the advice or treatment was successful. 

Demographic terms 

Age-Age is classified by the age of the respondent at 

her last birthday before the date of interview. 

Race-Race refers to the race of the woman interviewed 

and is reported as black, white, or other. In Cycle III, race 

was classified according to the woman’s report of which race 

best described her. In Cycles I and II, race was classified 

by the observation of the interviewer. Comparisons of the 

results of Cycle III using both definitions indicate that results 

of both methods of classification are very similar. 

Marital status-Persons were classified by marital status 

as married, widowed, divorced, separated, or never married. 

In Cycles I and II, informally-married women-women who 

volunteered that they were sharing living quarters with their 

sexual partner-were classified as currently married. These 

women constituted about 2 percent of currently married respondents in Cycle I and 3 percent in Cycle II. In Cycle III, 

such women were classified according to their legal marital 

status. 

In all cycles, women who were married but separated 

from their spouse were classified as separated if the reason 

for the separation was marital discord, and as currently married 

otherwise. 

Hispanic origin-4 respondent was classified as being 

of Hispanic origin if she reported that her only or principal 

national origin was Puerto Rican, Cuban, Mexican American, 

Central or South American, or other Spanish. In tables where 

data are presented for women by race, women of Hispanic 

origin are included in the statistics for white and black women 

if they were classified as such by race. 

50 
Region of residence-Data are classified by region of 

residence into the four major Census regions: Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. Sample size greatly restricts the possibility of meaningful analyses by social characteristics among 

smaller geographic divisions. The areas constituting these four 

major geographic regions are 

Geographic region and 

diviskm 

Northeast 

New England . . . . . . _ . . . . 

Middle Atlantic . . . . . . . . . . . 

Midwest 

East North Central . . . . . . . . 

West North Central . . . . . . . 

South 

South Atlantic . . . . . . _ . . _ . 

East South Central . . . . . _. 

West South Central . . . . . . 

West 

Mountain . . . . . . . . . . . . . , _ . 

Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

States included 

Maine, New Hampshire, 

Massachusetts, Rhode 

Connecticut. 

New York, New Jersey, 

vania. 

Vermont, 

Island, 

PennsylOhio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, 

Wisconsin. 

Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, North 

Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, 

Kansas. 

Delaware, Maryland, District of Cofumbia, Virginia, West Virginia, North 

Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, 

Florida. 

Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, 

Mississippi. 

Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, 

Texas. 

Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Coforado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, 

Nevada. 

Washington, Oregon, California. 

Place of residence-Data are classified by place of residence into two categories, metropolitan and non-metropolitan 

areas, using 1980 census population counts. A respondent’s 

place of residence is metropolitan if the Census classified 

the area as part of a standard metropolitan statistical area 

(SMSA), as established by the U.S. Office of Management 

and Budget. and non-metropolitan if it is not in an SMSA. 

Non-metropolitan areas may include both rural and urban 

places. 

Educafion-Education was classified according to the 

highest grade or year of regular school or college that was 

completed. Determination of the highest year of regular school 

or college completed by the respondent was based on responses 

to a series of questions concerning (a) the last grade or year 

of school attended and (b) whether that grade was completed. 

Religion-Women were classified by religion in response 

to the question, “Are you Protestant, Roman Catholic, Jewish, 

or something else?” In addition to the three major religious 

groupings, two other categories-other and none-were used. 

Because the category of Protestant includes numerous individual denominations, these respondents were further asked 

to identify the denomination to which they belonged. Those 

who answered “other” to the original question and named 

a Protestant denomination were included as Protestant. Although specific denominational names were obtained and recorded, the numbers of cases for most denominations were 

too few to produce reliable estimates; therefore they were 

combined in larger categories. 

Povero level income-The poverty index ratio was calculated by dividing the total family income by the weighted 

average threshold income of families with the head of household under 65 years of age based on the poverty levels shown 

in U.S. Bureau of the Census Current Population Reports, 

Series P-60, No. 140, “Money Income and Poverty Status 

of Families and Persons in the United States, 1982,” table A-3.3’ This definition takes into account the sex of the 

family head and the number of persons in the family. Total 

family income includes income from all sources for all members of the respondent’s family. For a substantial number 

of respondents (22 percent). total family income was not 

ascertained. These missing values were imputed using a known 

value of another similar, randomly selected respondent. Because of these high levels of missing data, small differences 

by poverty level income should be interpreted with caution. 

NOTE: A list ofreferences follows the text. 

51 
Appendix III. Section E of the Under 25 questionnaire 

In this survey, we are also talking with women about family planning services. Same women have used these services 

to help them become pregnant, and others have used them to plan the pregnancies they want, or to prevent pregnancies 

they do not want. 

BEGIN CARD 18 

E-l. Have you (or your husband) ever been to a doctor or clinic to talk about ways to help you become pregnant? 

Yes.....................1 

No . . . . . . . . . . ..*........ 2 

18 

E-2. (Not counting routine care or advice about a pregnancy), have you (or your husband) ever been to a doctor or 

clinic to talk about ways to help you prevent a miscarriage? 

Yes.....................1 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

19 

I 80X 46. IF NO TO BOTH E-l AND E-2, GO TO 80X 47. 

OTHERWISE,NTINU~ I 

E-3. What kinds of medical treatment or advice have you (or your husband) had to help you (become pregnant/prevent ’ cl 

miscarriage)? (RECORD VERBATIM AND CIRCLE APPROPRIATE CODE.) 20 

Respondent on1 y received advice/ 

treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 

Husband only received advice/ 

treatment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

Roth received advice/treatment . . . . . . . 3 

21-24 

Cm 

25-28 

E-4. When was the last time you (or your husband) visited a doctor or clinic for this treatment or advice? 

I [Zr 

MONTH YEAR 29-32 

E-S. To which of the places on this card did you go for that visit? 

HAND rl CARD 

19 

A. 

B. 

C. 

D. 

E. 

F. 

G. 

H. 

I. 

Community health center clinic. . . . . . 01 

Public health department clinic . . . . . 02 

Family planning clinic. . . . . . . . . . 03 

Student health service clinic . . . . . . 04 

Military health service clinic. . . . . . 05 

hospital clinic . . . . , . . . . . . . . 06 

Private doctor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 07 

Private group practice, co-op, 

or private clinic . . . . . . . . . . . 08 

Other (SPECIFY) 09 

33-34 

BOX 47. IF R OR HUSBAND BECAME STERILE OR HAD OPERATION BEFORE 

JANUARY 1979 (SEE D-4, PAGE 47, AND D-13, PAGE 491, GO 

TO E-19, PAGE 58. OTHERWISE, CONTINUE. q 

35 

52 
E-6. During the past three years, that is, since (MONTH/YEAR), has a doctor or other trained person prescribed, or 

talked with you about a method for delaying or preventing a pregnancy? 

Yes ................... ..I 

No ..................... . 

36 

E-7. This card shows a list of services that are provided to women for their family planning needs. Please look 

it over with me. In the past three years, that is, since (MONTH/YEAR), have you talked with a counselor, a 

doctor or some other trained person for advice or counseling about . . . 

YES NO 

-- 

A. Any problems or worries about sexual intercourse? . . . . . 1 

8. An unwanted pregnancy or one that occurred 

2 37 

at a bad time?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 38 

C. Having a sterilizing operation? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 39 

D. Whether or not to have an abortion? . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 40 

E. Birth control?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 41 

E-8. In the past three years, have you had a check-up or medical test to check for . . . 

YES NO 

cl 

-- 

HAND F. Correct use, fit, or position of a birth control method?. . 1 2 

CARD G. Health problems from using a birth control method?. . . . . 1 2 

20 H. A pregnancy test? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 

42 

43 

44 

E-9. In the past three years have you visited a doctor or clinic . . . 

YES NO 

cl 

-- 

HAM) I. To renew a method of birth control you were 

CARD already using, like getting a new prescrip20 tion or replacing an IUD? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 

J. To get a method of birth control or a prescription for a method? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 

45 

46 

BOX 48. IF R REPORTED NO VISITS IN E-7, E-8, AND E-9, GO TO E-19, 

PAGE 58. OTHERWISE, CONTINUE. 

E-10. You told me that in the past three years you have received the following family planning services: (READ 

LETTERS FOR SERVICES REPORTED IN E-7, E-8, AND E-9). Thinking now about the past 12 months, which of these 

services, if any, did YOU receive since (MONTH/YEAR)? (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) 

HAND 

cl 

CARD 

20 

Advice or counseling on: 

\ 

A. Any problems or worries about sexual intercourse . . 01 

B. An unwanted pregnancy or one that occurred at 

a bad time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 02 

C. Having a sterilizing operation . . . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. Whether or not to have an abortion . . . . . . . . . 04 

E. Birth control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05 

Check-up or medical test for: . (E-11) 

F. Correct use, fit, or position of a birth 

control method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06 

G. Health problems from using a birth control method. . 07 

H. Pregnancy test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08 

I. Renewing an old method of birth control . . . . . . . . . 09 

J. Getting a method of birth control . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 

No services in past 12 months . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 (E-16) 

ul 

47-48 

I 

49-50 

I 

51-52 

In 

53-54 
E-11. This card lists the different kinds of counselors, clinics, and doctor’s offices where women may get (this/ 

these) service(s). In the past 12 months, that is, since (MONTH/YEAR), at which of the places on this card 

have you received (this/these) family planning service(s)? (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY. IF NECESSARY, PROBE BY 

READING SERVICES REPORTED IN E-IO.) 

Counselors : 

A. Minister, priest, religious counselor. . . . . . . . 01 

8. School counselor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 02 

C. Family and social services agency. . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. Youth center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04 

E. Other counselor (SPECIFY) 05 

Clinics: 

F. Hospital clinic. .................. 06 

G. Family planning clinic ............... 07 

H. Community health center clinic ........... 08 

I. Abortion clinic. .................. 09 

J. Public health department clinic. .......... ID 

K. Military health service clinic ........... 11 

L. Student health service clinic. ........... 12 

M. Other clinic (SPECIFY) 13 

Private Medical Services: 

N. Private doctor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

P. Private group practice, co-op, or private clinic . . 15 

m 

55-56 

m 

57-58 

E-12. During the past 12 months, how many different times altogether have you visited a counselor, clinic, or doctor 

for (this/these) family planning service(s)? (IF NECESSARY, PROBE BY READING SERVICES REPORTED IN E-IO.) 

One visit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 (E-15) 

Two or more visits . . . (BOX 49) 

NUMBER 

BOX 49. IF ONLY ONE KIND OF PLACE REPORTED -IN E-II, GO TO E-l 5. 

OTHERWISE, CONTINUE. 

E-13. 

HAtW 

C 

CARD 

21 I 

How many of these visits in the last 12 months were to clinics, such as those listed under "clinics" on the 

card? 

NUMBER 

BOX 50. IF NUMBER GIVEN IN E-13 EQUALS NUMBER GIVEN IN E-12, GO TO E-15. 

OTHERWISE, CONTINUE. 

E-14. How many of these visits in the last 12 months were to a private doctor's office or a private medical 

practice? 

NUMBER 

cl 

60 

q 

61 
E-15. In the past 12 months, during a visit for family planning services, have you had a . . . 

YES 

- No 

A.Pap smear?.................. 1 2 62 

B. Pelvic exam? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 63 

C. Breast exam? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 64 

D. Blood pressure test? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 65 

E. Urinalysis?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 66 

F. Test for venereal disease or VD? . . . . . . . 1 2 67 

BOX 51. CHECK E-l 2. NUMBER OF VISITS IN LAST 12 MONTHS: 

ONE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 (E-18) 

TWO OR MORE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 (E-16) 

E-16. Thinking now about the last time you visited a counselor, clinic or doctor for family planning services, which 

of the services shown on the card did you receive? Please tell me the letter for each service you received. 

(CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) 

BEGIN CARD 19 

HAND 

cl 

CARD 

20 

Advice or counseling on: 

A. Any problems or worries about sexual intercourse . . 01 

B. An unwanted pregnancy or one that occurred at 

abadtime.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..02 

C. Having a sterilizing operation . . . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. Whether or not to have an abortion . . . . . . . . . 04 

E. Birth control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05 

Check-up or medical test for: 

ccl 

18-19 

III 

20-21 

F. Correct use, fit, or position of a birth 

control method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06 

In 

22-23 

G. Health problems from using a birth control 

method......................0 7 

H. Pregnancy test ................... 08 

I. Renewing an old method of birth control ......... 09 

J. Getting a method of birth control ............ ID 

24-25 

E-17. To which of the places on the card did you go for that last visit? Please tell me the letter that describes 

the place. (CIRCLE ONLY ONE RESPONSE.) 

HAMI 

cl 

CARD 

21 

Counselors : 

A. Minister, priest, religious counseIor. . . . . . . . 01 

B. School counselor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 02 

C. Family and social services agency. . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. Youth center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04 

E. Other counselor (SPECIFY) 05 

Clinics: . 

F. 

G. 

H. 

I. 

J. 

K. 

L. 

M. 

Private 

N. 

P. 

Hospital clinic. .................. 06 

Family planning clinic ............... 07 

Community health center clinic ........... 08 

Abortion clinic. .................. 09 

Public health department clinic. .......... 10 

Military health service clinic . h ......... 11 

Student health service clinic. ........... 12 

Other clinic (SPECIFY) 13 

Medical Services : 

Private doctor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . 14 

Private group practice, co-op or private clinic. . . 15 

26-27 

55 
E-18. This card lists some of the ways in which medical bills are paid. Men you last visited a counselor, clinic 

or doctor for family planning services, in which of these ways was the bill paid? (IF BILL HAS NOT BEEN PAID, 

PROBE : In which of these ways will the bill be paid? CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY AND PROBE: Wat other ways?) 

A. Your (or your husband’s) own income . . . 01’ 

B. Partner/boyfriend or his family . . . . . 02 m 

C. Insurance (which you carry or is 28-29 

carried for you) . . . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. No charge -- paid by Medicaid . . . . . . 04’ (E-20) 

E. Government assistance other than I 

Medicaid (state or local) . . . . . . . 05 30-31 

F. Military. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06 

G. Parents or other relatives. . . . . . . . 07 

H. Some other way (SPECIFY) 08, m 

32-33 

E-19. (This card lists services that are provided to women for their family planning needs.) Have you ever visited 

a counselor, a clinic or a doctor for 2 of these family planning services? 

HAN) cl CARD 

20 

Yes. .................... 1 (E-20) 

No ..................... 2 (E-24) 

34 

E-20. Thinking back to the very first time you received any of the family planning services on this card, 

when was that? 

I (E-21) I I I I I 

tmm (SEASON) YEAR 35-38 

Don’t know. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9898 (E-20a) 

E-20a. How old were you at that time? 

E-20b. Was it before your th birthday or after? 

III 

39-40 

Before. ....................... .I 

After. 2 

4, 

......................... 

E-21. At that first visit, which of the services on the card did you receive? Please tell me the letter that 

describes each service you received at that first visit. (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) 

Advice or counseling on: 

A. Any problems or worries about sexual intercourse . . 01 

B. An unwanted pregnancy or one that occurred at 

abadtime.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..D2 

C. Having a sterilizing operation . . . . . . . . . . . 03 

D. Whether or not to have an abortion . . . . . . . . . 04 

E. Birth control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05 

Check-up or medical test for: 

F. Correct use, fit, or position of a.birth 

control method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06 

G. Health problems from using a birth control 

method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 07 

H. Pregnancy test . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . 08 

I. Renewing an old method of birth control . . . . . . . . . 09 

J. Getting a method of birth control . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

In 

42-43 

III 

44-45 

ul 

46-47 

ul 

48-49 

58 
,-22. To which of the places on the card did you go that first time ? Please tell me the letter that describes the 

place. (CIRCLE ONLY ONE RESPDNSE.) 

1 HAN) 

CARD J 21 

Counselors: 

A. Minister, priest, religious counselor. ....... 01 

B. School counselor .................. 02 

C. Family and social services agency. ......... 03 

D. Youth center .................... 04 

E. Other counselor (SPECIFY) 05 

Clinics : 

F. Hospital clinic. .................. 06 

G, Family planning clinic ............... 07 

H, Community health center clinic ........... 08 

I. Abortion clinic. .................. 09 

J. Public health department clinic. .......... 10 

K. Military health service clinic ........... 11 

L. Student health service clinic. ........... 12 

M. Other clinic (SPECIFY) 13 

Private Medical Services: 

N. Private doctor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

P. Private group practice, co-op or private clinic. . . 15 

50-51 

E-23. In rrhich of the ways on this card did you learn about or were you referred to this (PLACE) for your first 

visit? (CIRCLE ALL THAT APPLY.) 

A. Private doctor or medical service. ..... 01 

B. Family planning clinic ........... 02 

C. Another kind of clinic ........... 03 

D. School counselor or teacher. ........ 04 

E. Husband, partner, or boyfriend ....... 05 

F. (Other) friend ............... 06 

G. Parents. .................. 07 

H. Another relative .............. 08 

I. Newspaper or magazine. ........... 09 

J. Telephone directory. ............ 10 

K. other (SPECIFY) 11 

m 

52-53 

m 

54-55 

E-24. To get a cunplete picture of childbearing end women’s health in this country, we aIs0 need to know about the 

treatment women have received for health problems that could affect their childbearing. Have you ever been 

treated in a doctor’s office, clinic, or emergency room for an infection in your fallopian tubes, wanb, or 

ovaries, also called a pelvic infection, pelvic inflanrnatory disease or PID? (IF DON’T KNOW, PROBE: a female 

infection causing abdominal pain or lowar stomach cramps.) 

Yes. .................... 1 (E-25) 

No ..................... 2 (~-26) 

56 

57 
E-25. l-law many different times have you been hospitalized one day or longer for a pelvic infection? Would you 

say . . . 

Never, .................. .7 

Once .................... .2 

2-3 times, ................. 3 

Or, more than 3 times? ........... 4 

57 

E-26. Have you ever been treated in a doctor’s office, clinic, or emergency room for gonorrhea? 

Yes................,....? 

No . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 

58 

U.S. W'ERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1986-1 8 1-3 3 5/ 4 0 0 2 1 

58 
‘ital and Health Statistics 

eries descriptions 

RIES 1. 

RIES 2. 

:RIES 3. 

iflIES 4 

!F?lES 5. 

iFtIES 10 

IRIES 11 

ERIES 12 

ERIES 13 

Programs and Collection Procedures-Repsrts describing 

the general programs of the National Center for Health 

Statistics and its offices and divisions and the data collection methods used. They also include definitions and 

other material necessary for understanding the data. 

Data Evaluation and Methods Research-Studies of new 

statistical methodology including experimental tests of 

new survey methods, studies of vital statistics collection 

methods, new analytical techniques, objective evaluations 

of reliability of collected data, and contributions to 

statistical theory Studies also include comparison of 

U.S. methodology with those of other countries. 

Analytical and Epidemiological Studies-Reports presenting analytical or interpretive studies based on vital 

and health statistics, carrying the analysis further than 

the expository types of reports in the other series. 

Documents and Committee Reports-FInal reports of 

major commIttees concerned with vital and health statlstlcs and documents such as recommended model vltal 

reglstratlon laws and revised birth and death certificates. 

Comparative International Vital and Health Statistics 

Reports-Analytical and descriptive reports comparing 

US vItaI and health statistics with those of other countries. 

Data From the National Health Interview Survey-Statistics on illness, accidental injuries, disability, use of hospltal, medlcal, dental, and other services, and other 

health-related topics, all based on data collected in the 

contlnulng natlonal household intervIew survey 

Data From the National Health Examination Survey and 

the National Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyData from direct examination, testing, and measurement 

of national samples of the civilian noninstitutionalized 

population provide the basis for Ill estimates of the 

medically deftned prevalence of specific diseases in the 

United States and the distributions of the population 

with respect to physical. physiological. and psychological characteristics and (21 analysis of relationshlps 

among the various measurements wthout reference to 

an explicit finite unwerse of persons. 

Data From the Institutionalized Population Surveys-DIScontinued in 1975. Reports from these surveys are IW 

eluded in Series 13. 

Data on Health Resources Utilization-Statlstlcs on the 

utilization of health manpower and facilities providing 

long-term care, ambulatory care, hospital care, and family 

planning services. 

SERIES 14. Data on Health Resources: Manpower and FacilitiesStatistics on the numbers, geographic dlstributlon, and 

characteristics of health resources including physicians, 

dentists, nurses, other health occupations, hospltals, 

nursing homes, and outpatient facilities 

SERIES 15. Data From Special Surveys-Statistics on health and 

health-related topics collected in special surveys that 

are not a part of the contlnulng data systems of the 

National Center for Health Statistics 

SERIES 20. Data on Mortality-Various statistics on mortahtv other 

than as Included I” regular annual or monthly reports 

Special analyses by cause of death, age, and other demographic variables; geographic and tbme series analyses, 

and statistics on characteristics o! deaths not avaIlable 

from the vttal records based on sample surveys of thaw 

records. 

SERIES 21 Data on Natality, Marriage, and Divorce-Various statlstlcs on natallty, marrfage, and divorce other than as 

Included in regular annual or monthly reports. Special 

analyses by demographic variables, geographic and time 

serves analyses. studies of fertilltv; and statistics on 

charactrrlstics of hlrths not avaIlable from the vltal 

records based on sample surveys of those records. 

SERIES 22. Data From the National Mortality and Natality SurveysDiscontinued in 1975. Reports from these sample surveys 

based on vltal records are Included in Series 20 and 21, 

respectively 

SERIES 23 Data From the National Survey of Family GrowthStatlstlcs on fertlhty, family formatIon and dissolution. 

family planning. and related maternal and infant health 

topics derived from a periodic survey of a natIonwIde 

probah!hty sample of ever-married women 1544 years 

of age. 

For answers to questions about this report or for a ltst of tltkS of 

reports published in these series, contact 

Scientific and Technical Information Branch 

National Center for Health Statistics 

Public Health Ser.‘lce 

Hyattsville. Md 20782 

301-436-8500 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Public Health Service 

National Center for Health Statisttcs 

3700 East-West Highway 

Hyattswlle, Maryland 20782 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 87-1989, Series 23, No. 13