Trial reportContraception2012
Results from pooled Phase III studies of ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception.
Trial report in Contraception, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 4 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- 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
- Hormonal contraceptives for contraception in overweight or obese women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Contraception and Reproductive Planning for Women With Cardiovascular Disease: JACC Focus Seminar 5/5.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2021Review
- Improving adolescent knowledge of emergency contraception: challenges and solutions.Open access journal of contraception · 2016Review
- Obesity and hormonal contraceptive efficacy.Women's health (London, England) · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUlipristal acetate (UPA) is a new effective option to prevent unintended pregnancies up to 5 days after unprotected intercourse. We used pooled data from two Phase III studies to refine our understanding of the efficacy of UPA by time from unprotected intercourse and the effects of other factors on pregnancy rates. STUDY
designData from two Phase III studies were pooled to create a larger analysis population. Analyses were performed on the first participation of 2183 women.
resultsA total of 41 women became pregnant despite the use of UPA, yielding an overall proportion pregnant of 1.9% (1.3%-2.5%). Proportions of pregnant women were higher among those with further acts of unprotected intercourse in the same cycle and among obese women. These varied from 1.3% (0.9%-2.0%) among nonobese women who had no further acts of unprotected intercourse (n=1704) to 8.3% (0.2%-38.5%) among obese women who had subsequent unprotected intercourse (n=12).
conclusionsUPA is effective and safe in preventing pregnancy after unprotected intercourse. Its effectiveness is lower among women who have subsequent unprotected intercourse and among obese women.
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.