ArticleAmerican journal of public health2009
Cost savings from the provision of specific methods of contraception in a publicly funded program.
Article in American journal of public health, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Youth-Friendly Family Planning Services for Young People: A Systematic Review Update.American journal of preventive medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Funding policies and postabortion long-acting reversible contraception: results from a cluster randomized trial.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2016Trial
- Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2011Trial
- State-level trends in access to Medicaid family planning services, 2008-2023.Health services research · 2025Article
- Perceptions of women and their partners on postabortion intrauterine contraception: A qualitative study in central Uganda.PloS one · 2025Article
- Healthcare providers' perceptions on post abortion intrauterine contraception: A qualitative study in central Uganda.PloS one · 2024Article
- Association of State Funding for Comprehensive Reproductive Health Care With Use of Contraception Among Latina Patients and Non-Latina Patients in Oregon.JAMA health forum · 2023Article
- Contraceptive Use and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Women Enrolled in South Carolina Medicaid Programs.Maternal and child health journal · 2021Article
- Development of a pharmacoeconomic registry: an example using hormonal contraceptives.Health economics review · 2021Article
- Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Users' Knowledge, Conversations with Healthcare Providers, and Condom Use: Findings from a U.S. Nationally Representative Probability Survey.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2021Article
- Insights in Public Health: Insurance Coverage for Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Placed in Office: A Buy and Bill Demonstration Project in Hawai'i.Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare · 2020Article
- Prescription Contraceptive Sales Following the Affordable Care Act.Maternal and child health journal · 2019Article
- Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Free of Charge, Method Initiation, and Abortion Rates in Finland.American journal of public health · 2018Article
- Trends in use of and complications from intrauterine contraceptive devices and tubal ligation or occlusion.Reproductive health · 2017Article
- Eliminating health disparities in unintended pregnancy with long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2016Review
- Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptives: An Important Approach to Reduce Unintended Pregnancies.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2016Article
- Barriers to Postpartum Contraception in Texas and Pregnancy Within 2 Years of Delivery.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2016Article
- Improving Access to Long-Acting Contraceptive Methods and Reducing Unplanned Pregnancy Among Women with Substance Use Disorders.Substance abuse : research and treatment · 2016Review
- The Cost-Effectiveness of Emergency Hormonal Contraception with Ulipristal Acetate versus Levonorgestrel for Minors in France.PloS one · 2015Article
- Immediate post-abortion insertion of intrauterine contraceptives (IUC) in a diverse urban population.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe examined the cost-effectiveness of contraceptive methods dispensed in 2003 to 955,000 women in Family PACT (Planning, Access, Care and Treatment), California's publicly funded family planning program.
methodsWe estimated the number of pregnancies averted by each contraceptive method and compared the cost of providing each method with the savings from averted pregnancies.
resultsMore than half of the 178,000 averted pregnancies were attributable to oral contraceptives, one fifth to injectable methods, and one tenth each to the patch and barrier methods. The implant and intrauterine contraceptives were the most cost-effective, with cost savings of more than $7.00 for every $1.00 spent in services and supplies. Per $1.00 spent, injectable contraceptives yielded savings of $5.60; oral contraceptives, $4.07; the patch, $2.99; the vaginal ring, $2.55; barrier methods, $1.34; and emergency contraceptives, $1.43.
conclusionsAll contraceptive methods were cost-effective-they saved more in public expenditures for unintended pregnancies than they cost to provide. Because no single method is clinically recommended to every woman, it is medically and fiscally advisable for public health programs to offer all contraceptive methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.