ArticleContraception2013
Weight change at 12 months in users of three progestin-only contraceptive methods.
Article in Contraception, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01986439 (The Contraceptive Choice Project), which is not on this map. Cited by 37 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.
The Contraceptive Choice Project
Who cites it
37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 132 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review on clinical effectiveness, side-effect profile and meta-analysis on continuation rate of etonogestrel contraceptive implant.Reproductive health · 2021Pooled it
- Dietary intake and eating behavior in depot medroxyprogesterone acetate users: a systematic review.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 2018Pooled it
- Progestin-only contraceptives: effects on weight.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Progestin-only contraceptives: effects on weight.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013Pooled it
- The efficacy of the levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus oral megestrol acetate in treating atypical endometrial hyperplasia: a superior randomized controlled trial.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2024Trial
- Contraceptive-Induced Weight Gain-Myth and Reality Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Understanding contraceptive switching rationales from real world clinical notes using large language models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Genetic variation associated with side effects of hormonal contraception exposure: a narrative review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Perceptions of women and their partners on postabortion intrauterine contraception: A qualitative study in central Uganda.PloS one · 2025Article
- Does it hold weight? The perceived effects of contraceptive use on weight status in females: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2025Article
- Exploring the Feasibility of a Bracketing Approach Utilizing Modeling for Development of Long-Acting Injectables for Regulatory Approval-A Case Study Using Levonorgestrel.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Body Mass Index and Levonorgestrel Device Expulsion in Adolescents and Young Adults.Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology · 2024Article
- Outcomes of etonogestrel subdermal contraceptive implants: A single center cross-sectional study.Saudi medical journal · 2024Article
- Article
- Fasting blood glucose, blood pressure and body mass index among combined oral contraceptive users in Chencha town Southern Ethiopia, 2019.Frontiers in global women's health · 2023Article
- Contraception for Adolescents and Young Women with Type 2 Diabetes-Specific Considerations.Current diabetes reports · 2022Review
- Safety and Benefits of Contraceptives Implants: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Weight change among women using intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper intrauterine device, or a levonorgestrel implant for contraception: Findings from a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Retrospective Analysis of the Effectiveness and Reversibility of Long-Acting Contraception Etonogestrel (ImplanonAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConcerns about weight gain may influence contraceptive use. We compared the change in body weight over the first 12 months of use between women using the etonogestrel (ENG) implant, the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) with women using the copper intrauterine device (IUD). STUDY
designThis was a substudy of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project, a prospective cohort study of 9256 women provided no-cost contraception. Women who had been using the ENG implant, LNG-IUS, DMPA or copper IUD continuously for at least 11 months were eligible for participation. We obtained body weight at enrollment and at 12 months and compared the weight change for each progestin-only method to the copper IUD.
resultsWe enrolled a total of 427 women: 130 ENG implant users, 130 LNG-IUS users, 67 DMPA users and 100 copper IUD users. The mean weight change (in kilograms) over 12 months was 2.1 for ENG implant users [standard deviation (SD)=6.7]; 1.0 for LNG-IUS users (SD=5.3); 2.2 for DMPA users (SD=4.9) and 0.2 for copper IUD users (SD=5.1). The range of weight change was broad across all contraceptive methods. In the unadjusted linear regression model, ENG implant and DMPA use were associated with weight gain compared to the copper IUD. However, in the adjusted model, no difference in weight gain with the ENG implant, LNG-IUS or DMPA was observed. Only Black race was associated with significant weight gain (1.3 kg, 95% confidence interval=0.2-2.4) when compared to other racial groups.
conclusionsWeight change was variable among women using progestin-only contraceptives. Black race was a significant predictor of weight gain among contraceptive users.
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.