Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22995537›Full record

SynthesisContraception2013

When can a woman have an intrauterine device inserted? A systematic review.

Maura K Whiteman, Crystal P Tyler, Suzanne G Folger, Mary E Gaffield, Kathryn M Curtis

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Contraception, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Contraception for AdolescentsJournal of clinical research in pediatric endocrinology · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. In Reply.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
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

5 authors.

Maura K WhitemanDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. acq5@cdc.gov
Crystal P Tyler
Suzanne G Folger
Mary E Gaffield
Kathryn M Curtis

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntrauterine device (IUD) insertion during menses may be viewed as preferable by some providers, as it provides reassurance that the woman is not pregnant. However, this practice may result in unnecessary inconvenience and cost to women. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence for the effect of inserting IUDs on different days of the menstrual cycle on contraceptive continuation, effectiveness and safety. STUDY

designWe searched the MEDLINE database for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from database inception through March 2012 concerning the effect of inserting copper IUDs (Cu-IUD) or levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs (LNG-IUDs) on different days of the menstrual cycle on contraceptive continuation, effectiveness, and safety. The quality of each individual piece of evidence was assessed using the United States Preventive Services Task Force grading system.

resultsWe identified eight articles that met the criteria for review. Each study examined the Cu-IUD; no studies were identified that examined the LNG-IUD. Overall, these studies suggest that timing of Cu-IUD insertion has little effect on longer term outcomes (rates of continuation, removal, expulsion, or pregnancy) or on shorter term outcomes (pain at insertion, bleeding at insertion, immediate expulsion). Specifically, there was no evidence to suggest that outcomes were better when Cu-IUD insertions were performed during menses. Limitations of the studies include small sample sizes for insertions performed during later days of the menstrual cycle and non-randomized assignment to timing of insertion.

conclusionsThere is fair evidence (body of evidence grading: II-2, fair) indicating that timing of Cu-IUD insertion has little effect on contraceptive continuation, effectiveness or safety.

Indexed as

Menstrual CycleFemaleHumansIntrauterine Devices

Identifiers

PMID22995537
PMCPMC4578632

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.