Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20570955›Full record

ReviewEpidemiologic reviews2010

Family planning and the burden of unintended pregnancies.

Amy O Tsui, Raegan McDonald-Mosley, Anne E Burke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Epidemiologic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 195 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
195citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

195 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. On-site IUD implementation in a student-run free clinic.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026
    Article

135 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Amy O TsuiPopulation, Family and Reproductive Health Department, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, W4041, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. atsui@jhsph.edu
Raegan McDonald-Mosley
Anne E Burke

Funding

Research Infrastructure for the Hopkins Population CenterR24HD042854 · NICHD · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI CHERLIN, ANDREW J · 2003 to 2017
$5.1M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Family planning is hailed as one of the great public health achievements of the last century, and worldwide acceptance has risen to three-fifths of exposed couples. In many countries, however, uptake of modern contraception is constrained by limited access and weak service delivery, and the burden of unintended pregnancy is still large. This review focuses on family planning's efficacy in preventing unintended pregnancies and their health burden. The authors first describe an epidemiologic framework for reproductive behavior and pregnancy intendedness and use it to guide the review of 21 recent, individual-level studies of pregnancy intentions, health outcomes, and contraception. They then review population-level studies of family planning's relation to reproductive, maternal, and newborn health benefits. Family planning is documented to prevent mother-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus, contribute to birth spacing, lower infant mortality risk, and reduce the number of abortions, especially unsafe ones. It is also shown to significantly lower maternal mortality and maternal morbidity associated with unintended pregnancy. Still, a new generation of research is needed to investigate the modest correlation between unintended pregnancy and contraceptive use rates to derive the full health benefits of a proven and cost-effective reproductive technology.

Indexed as

Family Planning ServicesPregnancy, UnplannedAdolescentAdultContraception BehaviorCost-Benefit AnalysisCosts and Cost AnalysisFemaleHealth SurveysHIV InfectionsHumansInfectious Disease Transmission, VerticalMiddle AgedPregnancyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID20570955
PMCPMC3115338

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.