Observational studyContraception2014
Emergency contraception with a copper IUD or oral levonorgestrel: an observational study of 1-year pregnancy rates.
Observational study in Contraception, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Estimating emergency contraception efficacy with levonorgestrel and copper intrauterine devices.Contraception · 2025Trial
- One-year pregnancy and continuation rates after placement of levonorgestrel or copper intrauterine devices for emergency contraception: a randomized controlled trial.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Trial
- We should really keep in touch: predictors of the ability to maintain contact with contraception clinical trial participants over 12 months.Contraception · 2014Trial
- Sociodemographic and Medical Characteristics of Women Applied for Emergency Contraception-A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Development and Pilot Testing of a Dispensing Protocol on Emergency Contraceptive Pills for Community Pharmacists in Belgium.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The efficacy of intrauterine devices for emergency contraception and beyond: a systematic review update.International journal of women's health · 2019Article
- Cost-effectiveness of emergency contraception options over 1 year.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Article
- The intrauterine device as emergency contraception: how much do young women know?Contraception · 2018Article
- Levonorgestrel only emergency contraceptive use and risk of ectopic pregnancy in Eldoret Kenya: a case-control study.The Pan African medical journal · 2018Article
- One-year continuation of copper or levonorgestrel intrauterine devices initiated at the time of emergency contraception.Contraception · 2017Article
- Choice of Emergency Contraceptive and Decision Making Regarding Subsequent Unintended Pregnancy.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2016Observational
- Preference for and efficacy of oral levonorgestrel for emergency contraception with concomitant placement of a levonorgestrel IUD: a prospective cohort study.Contraception · 2016Article
- Emergency contraception review: evidence-based recommendations for clinicians.Clinical obstetrics and gynecology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe investigated the 1-year pregnancy rates for emergency contraception (EC) users who selected the copper T380 intrauterine device (IUD) or oral levonorgestrel (LNG) for EC. STUDY
designThis prospective study followed women for 1 year after choosing either the copper T380 IUD or oral LNG for EC. The study was powered to detect a 6% difference in pregnancy rates within the year after presenting for EC.
resultsOf the 542 women who presented for EC, agreed to participate in the trial and met the inclusion criteria, 215 (40%) chose the copper IUD and 327 (60%) chose oral LNG. In the IUD group, 127 (59%) were nulligravid. IUD insertion failed in 42 women (19%). The 1-year follow-up rate was 443/542 (82%); 64% of IUD users contacted at 1 year still had their IUDs in place. The 1-year cumulative pregnancy rate in women choosing the IUD was 6.5% vs. 12.2% in those choosing oral LNG [hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29-0.97, p=.041]. By type of EC method actually received, corresponding values were 5.2% for copper IUD users vs. 12.3% for oral LNG users (HR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.85, p=.017). A multivariable logistic regression model controlling for demographic variables demonstrates that women who chose the IUD for EC had fewer pregnancies in the following year than those who chose oral LNG (HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96, p=.037).
conclusionOne year after presenting for EC, women choosing the copper IUD for EC were half as likely to have a pregnancy compared to those choosing oral LNG. IMPLICATIONS: Compared to EC users who choose oral levonorgestrel, those who select the copper IUD have lower rates of pregnancy in the next year. Greater use of the copper IUD for EC may lower rates of unintended pregnancy in high-risk 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.