ArticlePatient preference and adherence2015
Knowledge about missed contraceptive pills among married women at King Abdulaziz University Hospital.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge of married Saudi women about emergency contraception: A cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Knowledge on birth control pills among married rural Indian women.Bioinformation · 2024Article
- Muslim women's views and experiences of family planning in Saudi Arabia: a qualitative study.BMC women's health · 2023Article
- Utilization pattern and side effect profile of oral anticonceptives: A community-based cross-sectional study among Saudi women.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2020Article
- Knowledge and Practice of Contraception Use Among Females of Child-Bearing Age in Mosul, Iraq.International journal of women's health · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Oral Contraceptive Types in Relation to ABO Blood Groups Among Saudi Women of Different Reproductive Age Groups and Impact on Venous Thromboembolism.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are one of the most reliable methods of contraception. However, lack of knowledge about oral contraceptive use and inconsistent pill-taking might result in decreased efficacy. The study reported here aimed to explore women's knowledge about oral contraceptive use and assess the factors associated with knowledge about OCPs among users.
methodsThis cross-sectional survey was conducted at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia between April and June 2014. We included married, non-pregnant women >18 years old who had used a combined 21-day OCP for at least 3 months prior to recruitment. A questionnaire was used to collect the participants' demographic information. It also assessed their knowledge about OCPs. Data were entered into and analyzed using SPSS software.
resultsA total of 357 women were recruited. Of these, 57.7% reported they knew what to do after missing one or two pills, but only 18.3% knew exactly what to do after missing more than two pills consecutively. Postgraduate women had a significantly higher knowledge score than illiterate women (P=0.002) and those who had completed at least primary education (P=0.001). Conversely, there was no difference in knowledge scores between Saudi and expatriate women (P=0.2). Monthly incomes (P=0.2) and mode of OCP selection (P=0.2) were also not significantly associated with knowledge scores.
conclusionWomen had poor knowledge about OCP use. Appropriate measures should be taken to educate women about proper oral contraceptive use.
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.