Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21814535›Full record

ArticleDeutsches Arzteblatt international2011

Hormonal contraception--what kind, when, and for whom?

Inka Wiegratz, Christian J Thaler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Oral contraceptive use and fracture risk-a retrospective study of 12,970 women in the UK.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Pulmonary emboli following oral contraceptive misuse and long air travel.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2012
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Inka WiegratzKlinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Schwerpunkt Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Reproduktionsmedizin, Klinikum der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. Inka.Wiegratz@kgu.de
Christian J Thaler
Goethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Germany today, one-third of the 20 million women of child-bearing age use combined oral contraceptives (COCs). In this article, we summarize the current knowledge of the mode of action, wanted and unwanted side effects, and long-term risks of COCs. The levonorgestrel intrauterine device (IUD) and long-acting injectable or implantable monophasic progestogen preparations offer comparable contraceptive efficacy to COCs. Nonetheless, they are less frequently used in Germany than COCs, because of their propensity to cause breakthrough bleeding.

methodSelective review of the literature.

resultsCOCs suppress gonadotropin secretion and thereby inhibit follicular maturation and ovulation. Their correct use is associated with 0.3 pregnancies per 100 women per year, their typical use, with 1 pregnancy per 100 women per year (Pearl index). COCs have effects on the cardiovascular and hemostatic systems as well as on lipid and carbohydrate metabolism. When given in the presence of specific risk factors, they significantly increase the likelihood of cardiovascular disease and thromboembolism. Women with persistent human papilloma virus (HPV) infection who take COCs are at increased risk of developing invasive cervical cancer. On the other hand, COCs lower the cumulative incidence of endometrial and ovarian cancer by 30% to 50%, and that of colorectal cancer by 20% to 30%. Other malignancies seem to be unaffected by COC use.

conclusionAs long as personal and familial risk factors are carefully considered, COCs constitute a safe, reversible, and well-tolerated method of contraception.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDrug ImplantsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleGermanyHumansInjections, IntramuscularIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedLevonorgestrelPapillomavirus InfectionsPregnancyPregnancy, UnwantedProgesterone CongenersRisk FactorsContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDrug ImplantsLevonorgestrelProgesterone Congeners

Identifiers

PMID21814535
PMCPMC3149298
OpenAlexW2116804632

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.