Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25889419›Full record

SynthesisReproductive health2015

Optimizing the delivery of contraceptives in low- and middle-income countries through task shifting: a systematic review of effectiveness and safety.

Stephanie Polus, Simon Lewin, Claire Glenton, Priya M Lerberg, Eva Rehfuess, A Metin Gülmezoglu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 'Canadian liver journal · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Stephanie PolusInstitute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany. polus@ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de.
Simon LewinGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway. simon.lewin@kunnskapssenteret.no.
Claire GlentonGlobal Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway. claire.glenton@kunnskapssenteret.no.
Priya M LerbergDepartment of Community Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. priler@gmail.com.
Eva RehfuessInstitute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany. rehfuess@ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de.
A Metin GülmezogluDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. gulmezoglum@who.int.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the effectiveness and safety of task shifting for the delivery of injectable contraceptives, contraceptive implants, intrauterine devices (IUDs), tubal ligation and vasectomy in low- and middle-income countries.

methodsMultiple electronic databases were searched up to 25 May 2012 for studies which had assessed the delivery of contraceptives by health workers with lower levels of training, compared to delivery by health workers usually assigned this role, or compared to no organized provision of contraceptives. We included randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series. Data were extracted using a standard form and the certainty of the evidence found was assessed using GRADE.

resultsWe identified six randomized controlled trials published between 1977 and 1995 that assessed the safety and effectiveness of task shifting for the delivery of long-term contraceptives. Two studies assessed IUD insertion by nurses compared to doctors, two assessed IUD insertion by auxiliary nurse-midwives compared to doctors, one assessed tubal ligation by midwives compared to doctors, and one assessed the delivery of vasectomy by medical students compared to doctors. In general, little or no difference was found in contraceptive outcomes between cadres. Study design limitations and the low number of eligible studies, however, allow only limited conclusions to be drawn.

conclusionsThe findings indicate that task shifting for the delivery of long-term contraceptives may be a safe and effective approach to increasing access to contraception. Further research is needed because the certainty of the evidence identified is variable.

Indexed as

Developing CountriesTask Performance and AnalysisContraceptive AgentsDelivery of Health CareHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicContraceptive Agents

Identifiers

PMID25889419
PMCPMC4392779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.