Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20598282›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2010

Recommendations for intrauterine contraception: a randomized trial of the effects of patients' race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

Christine Dehlendorf, Rachel Ruskin, Kevin Grumbach, Eric Vittinghoff, Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, Dean Schillinger, Jody Steinauer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Lessons Learned from Replicating a Randomized Control Trial Evaluation of an App-Based Sexual Health Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Association of Area Deprivation Index with perinatal and COVID-19 outcomes during the early pandemic: a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study.The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Benefits of Hormonal Contraception Across the Lifespan: A Case-Based, Interactive Curriculum.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Trends in Continuation of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Among Adolescents Receiving Medicaid.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024
    Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Christine DehlendorfDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Rachel Ruskin
Kevin Grumbach
Eric Vittinghoff
Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo
Dean Schillinger
Jody Steinauer

Funding

CTSA: K12 COMPONENTKL2RR024130 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI JOHNSTON, S. CLAIBORNE · 2006 to 2011
$19.3M
NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR024130
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRecommendations by health care providers have been found to vary by patient race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status and may contribute to health disparities. This study investigated the effect of these factors on recommendations for contraception. STUDY

designOne of 18 videos depicting patients of varying sociodemographic characteristics was shown to each of 524 health care providers. Providers indicated whether they would recommend levonorgestrel intrauterine contraception to the patient shown in the video.

resultsLow socioeconomic status whites were less likely to have intrauterine contraception recommended than high socioeconomic status whites (odds ratio [OR], 0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.69); whereas, socioeconomic status had no significant effect among Latinas and blacks. By race/ethnicity, low socioeconomic status Latinas and blacks were more likely to have intrauterine contraception recommended than low socioeconomic status whites (OR, 3.4; and 95% CI, 1.1-10.2 and OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.0-9.6, respectively), with no effect of race/ethnicity for high socioeconomic status patients.

conclusionProviders may have biases about intrauterine contraception or make assumptions about its use based on patient race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedRacial GroupsSocial ClassContraceptive Agents, FemaleFemaleHumansLevonorgestrelMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsVideotape RecordingContraceptive Agents, FemaleLevonorgestrel

Identifiers

PMID20598282
PMCPMC3012124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.