ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2007
Women's preferences for the provision of emergency hormonal contraception services.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Pooled it
- Trial
- Expanding Access to Oral Contraceptive Pills: Do Consumers Prefer Over-the-Counter Availability?The patient · 2026Article
- Preferences for family planning education among men and women in rural, highly religious Tanzanian communities: a discrete choice experiment.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2020Article
- It is not always about gains: utilities and disutilities associated with treatment features in patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis.Patient preference and adherence · 2012Article
- Young women's perceptions and experiences with contraception supply in community pharmacies.Journal of the American Pharmacists Association : JAPhAArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo elicit women's preferences for routes of supply for emergency hormonal contraception (EHC). The objectives were to identify which attributes of services women regard as important and to identify how women trade off reductions in one attribute for an improvement in another.
methodA stated preference discrete choice experiment. Women attending sexual health services in a Primary Care Trust in the North West of England were invited to complete a self-completion questionnaire. Each respondent completed a questionnaire containing nine pair-wise choices. Demographic data were also collected. Conditional logit models were used to analyse the data.
main outcome measureWomen's preferences for, and trade-offs between, the attributes of opening hours, medical staff seen, cost of EHC, length of wait for an appointment, privacy of consultation and attitude of staff.
resultsTwo hundred and sixty-nine women attending clinics (mean age 23.8 years, SD+/-8.69) completed the questionnaire. Almost two thirds of the sample had previously used EHC. All six attributes of EHC services were statistically significant factors influencing women's preferences for the supply of EHC. A significant proportion of women indicated on at least one occasion that they would risk pregnancy rather than choose one of the services offered to them.
conclusionThese results suggest that the way in which a service is configured and presented to women is likely to influence which service is chosen. In this study, women prioritised visiting a service where they would be treated in a sympathetic and non-judgemental manner. They also prioritised privacy. The results also suggest that if women are dissatisfied with aspects of an EHC service, they may choose not to visit it, thereby risking an unwanted pregnancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17279450What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.