SynthesisHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2012
The efficacy of intrauterine devices for emergency contraception: a systematic review of 35 years of experience.
Synthesis in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 8 of them syntheses 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
66 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 258 citations in OpenAlex.
- U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2024Guideline
- Progestin intrauterine devices versus copper intrauterine devices for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2021Guideline
- Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Safety and effectiveness data for emergency contraceptive pills among women with obesity: a systematic review.Contraception · 2016Pooled it
- Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2015.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2015Guideline
- When can a woman have an intrauterine device inserted? A systematic review.Contraception · 2013Pooled it
- Estimating emergency contraception efficacy with levonorgestrel and copper intrauterine devices.Contraception · 2025Trial
- Rates of pregnancy among levonorgestrel and copper intrauterine emergency contraception initiators: Implications for backup contraception recommendations.Contraception · 2021Trial
- Levonorgestrel vs. Copper Intrauterine Devices for Emergency Contraception.The New England journal of medicine · 2021Trial
- Results from pooled Phase III studies of ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception.Contraception · 2012Trial
- Over-the-counter emergency contraceptive sales before and afterHealth affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Reproductive health in the liver transplant recipient.Liver transplantation : official publication of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the International Liver Transplantation Society · 2026Review
- Contraceptive access and infant health outcomes.Journal of health economics · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular-obstetric state-of-the-art review: pulmonary hypertension in pregnancy.Singapore medical journal · 2025Review
- Selection of long acting reversible contraception methods by emergency contraception clients: A prospective observational study.Contraception · 2025Observational
- An in-vivo study of the safety of copper-containing intrauterine devices in 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Safety of Progestogen Hormonal Contraceptive Methods during Lactation: An Overview.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- User Experience of Access to Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner and Emergency Contraception in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntrauterine devices (IUDs) have been studied for use for emergency contraception for at least 35 years. IUDs are safe and highly effective for emergency contraception and regular contraception, and are extremely cost-effective as an ongoing method. The objective of this study was to evaluate the existing data to estimate the efficacy of IUDs for emergency contraception.
methodsThe reference list for this study was generated from hand searching the reference lists of relevant articles and our own article archives, and electronic searches of several databases: Medline, Global Health, Clinicaltrials.gov, Popline, Wanfang Data (Chinese) and Weipu Data (Chinese). We included studies published in English or Chinese, with a defined population of women who presented for emergency contraception and were provided with an IUD, and in which the number of pregnancies was ascertained and loss to follow-up was clearly defined. Data from each article were abstracted independently by two reviewers.
resultsThe 42 studies (of 274 retrieved) that met our inclusion criteria were conducted in six countries between 1979 and 2011 and included eight different types of IUD and 7034 women. The maximum timeframe from intercourse to insertion of the IUD ranged from 2 days to 10 or more days; the majority of insertions (74% of studies) occurred within 5 days of intercourse. The pregnancy rate (excluding one outlier study) was 0.09%.
conclusionsIUDs are a highly effective method of contraception after unprotected intercourse. Because they are safe for the majority of women, highly effective and cost-effective when left in place as ongoing contraception, whenever clinically feasible IUDs should be included in the range of emergency contraception options offered to patients presenting after unprotected intercourse. This review is limited by the fact that the original studies did not provide sufficient data on the delay between intercourse and insertion of the IUD, parity, cycle day of intercourse or IUD type to allow analysis by any of these variables.
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.