Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16009669›Full record

ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2005

Impact on contraceptive practice of making emergency hormonal contraception available over the counter in Great Britain: repeated cross sectional surveys.

Cicely Marston, Howard Meltzer, Azeem Majeed

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
14.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review of services provided by pharmacies that promote healthy living.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Demographic and health impacts of women's bodily autonomy: switching prescription requirements for emergency contraceptives.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Role of the pharmacist in reducing healthcare costs: current insights.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. ["Emergency contraception 2010"].Atencion primaria · 2010
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cicely MarstonDepartment of Primary Care and Social Medicine, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, London W6 8RP. c.marston@imperial.ac.uk
Howard Meltzer
Azeem Majeed
Imperial College London · GBOffice for National Statistics · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the impact on contraceptive practice of making emergency hormonal contraception available over the counter.

designAnalysis of data on contraceptive practice for women aged 16-49 years in the period 2000-2 from the Omnibus Survey, a multipurpose survey in which around 7600 adults living in private households are interviewed each year.

settingPrivate households in Great Britain.

main outcome measuresUse of different types of contraception and rates of unprotected sex.

resultsAfter emergency hormonal contraception was made available over the counter, levels of use of different types of contraception by women aged 16-49 remained similar. No significant change occurred in the proportion of women using emergency hormonal contraception (8.4% in 2000, 7.9% in 2001, 7.2% in 2002) or having unprotected sex. A change did, however, occur in where women obtained emergency hormonal contraception; a smaller proportion of women obtained emergency hormonal contraception from physicians and a greater proportion bought it over the counter. No significant change occurred in the proportion of women using more reliable methods of contraception, such as the oral contraceptive pill, or in the proportion of women using emergency hormonal contraception more than once during a year.

conclusionsMaking emergency hormonal contraception available over the counter does not seem to have led to an increase in its use, to an increase in unprotected sex, or to a decrease in the use of more reliable methods of contraception.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChi-Square DistributionContraception BehaviorContraceptives, Postcoital, HormonalCross-Sectional StudiesEducational StatusFemaleHumansIncomeMarital StatusMiddle AgedNonprescription DrugsUnited KingdomWomenContraceptives, Postcoital, HormonalNonprescription DrugsEmpirical ApproachGenetics and Reproduction

Identifiers

PMID16009669
PMCPMC1181268
OpenAlexW2148397074

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.