ReviewPatient preference and adherence2014
Understanding benefits and addressing misperceptions and barriers to intrauterine device access among populations in the United States.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Same-day long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) placement: a systematic review of the benefits and barriers in the United States.BMC women's health · 2026Pooled it
- Use of Paracervical Blocks for Patients Who Undergo Intrauterine Device Insertion.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Exploring the determinants of family planning practices among women with diabetes and no pregnancy intention in Malaysia: women's voices.Korean journal of family medicine · 2026Article
- On-site IUD implementation in a student-run free clinic.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Article
- Pre-pregnancy intrauterine device use is associated with a reduced risk of subsequent preterm birth: a large population-based cohort study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Vitamin D Supplementation Selectively Affects Peripheral Lymphocyte Subsets in Infertile Women.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Exploring Language Used in Posts on r/birthcontrol: Case Study Using Data From Reddit Posts and Natural Language Processing to Advance Contraception Research.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- The Impact of Histone Modifications in Endometriosis Highlights New Therapeutic Opportunities.Cells · 2023Review
- Long-acting intrauterine systems: Recent advances, current challenges, and future opportunities.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2022Review
- History of IUD utilization and the risk of preterm birth: a cohort study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of an intrauterine device informative intervention among post-natal women in Western Jamaica.Reproductive health · 2021Article
- [Adolescents and teachers´ knowledge, attitude and practice towards contraception: results from a qualitative study conducted in the Democratic Republic of the Congo].The Pan African medical journal · 2021Article
- Increasing access to intrauterine contraceptive device uptake in Ghana: stakeholders views on task sharing service delivery with community health nurses.Ghana medical journal · 2020Article
- Do modern family planning methods impact women's quality of life? Jordanian women's perspective.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2019Article
- Attitudes and practices related to intrauterine devices for nulliparous women among Chinese health care providers.Reproductive health · 2019Article
- Potential for Improving Intrauterine Device (IUD) Service Delivery Quality: Results from a Secondary Data Analysis.Gates open research · 2019Article
- Use and discontinuation of intrauterine contraceptive device in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2018Article
- Role of the community pharmacist in emergency contraception counseling and delivery in the United States: current trends and future prospects.Integrated pharmacy research & practice · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three intrauterine devices (IUDs), one copper and two containing the progestin levonorgestrel, are available for use in the United States. IUDs offer higher rates of contraceptive efficacy than nonlong-acting methods, and several studies have demonstrated higher satisfaction rates and continuation rates of any birth control method. This efficacy is not affected by age or parity. The safety of IUDs is well studied, and the risks of pelvic inflammatory disease, perforation, expulsion, and ectopic pregnancy are all of very low incidence. Noncontraceptive benefits include decreased menstrual blood loss, improved dysmenorrhea, improved pelvic pain associated with endometriosis, and protection of the endometrium from hyperplasia. The use of IUDs is accepted in patients with multiple medical problems who may have contraindications to other birth control methods. Yet despite well-published data, concerns and misperceptions still persist, especially among younger populations and nulliparous women. Medical governing bodies advocate for use of IUDs in these populations, as safety and efficacy is unchanged, and IUDs have been shown to decrease unintended pregnancies. Dispersion of accurate information among patients and practitioners is needed to further increase the acceptability and use of IUDs.
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.