Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26546020›Full record

ReviewContraception2016

Safety data for levonorgestrel, ulipristal acetate and Yuzpe regimens for emergency contraception.

Tara C Jatlaoui, Halley Riley, Kathryn M Curtis

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Contraception, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Interventions for emergency contraception.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tara C JatlaouiDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: tjatlaoui@cdc.gov.
Halley RileyDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Kathryn M CurtisDivision of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledThe World Health Organization (WHO) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provide recommendations for use of emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs), including levonorgestrel (LNG) and combined oral contraceptives (COCs). A new ECP formulation, ulipristal acetate (UPA), is now available worldwide. To determine whether LNG, UPA or COC (Yuzpe) ECPs are safe for women with certain characteristics or medical conditions, we searched the PubMed and Cochrane databases for articles published from date of inception until May 2015 pertaining to the safety of LNG, UPA or Yuzpe ECP use. For direct evidence, we considered studies that looked at safety outcomes among women with certain medical conditions or characteristics taking ECPs compared with women not taking ECPs. For indirect evidence, we considered studies that reported pharmacokinetic (PK) data for ECP use among women with certain medical conditions or characteristics and studies that reported safety outcomes among healthy women taking ECPs. Five studies provided direct evidence; of these five studies, four examined LNG or Yuzpe use among pregnant or breastfeeding women, and one reported risk of ectopic pregnancy among women repeatedly using LNG ECPs. Poor pregnancy outcomes were rare among pregnant women who used LNG or Yuzpe ECPs during the conception cycle or early pregnancy. Breastfeeding outcomes did not differ between women exposed to LNG ECP and those unexposed, and there was no increased risk of ectopic pregnancy versus intrauterine pregnancy after repeated use of LNG ECPs compared with nonuse. Forty-five studies provided indirect evidence. One PK study demonstrated that LNG passes into breastmilk but in minimal quantities. In addition, nine studies examined pregnancy outcomes following ECP failure among healthy women, and 35 articles reported adverse events. Studies suggest that serious adverse events are rare among women taking any of these ECP formulations. IMPLICATIONS: Evidence on safety of ECPs among women with characteristics or medical conditions listed within WHO and CDC family planning guidance is limited. However, both direct and indirect evidence for our study question did not suggest any special safety concerns for the use of ECPs among women with particular medical conditions or personal characteristics, such as pregnancy, lactation or frequent ECP use.

Indexed as

Breast FeedingContraception, PostcoitalContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, PostcoitalFemaleHumansLactationLevonorgestrelNorpregnadienesPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeTreatment FailureContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraceptives, PostcoitalLevonorgestrelNorpregnadienesulipristal acetateEmergency contraceptive pillsLevonorgestrelSafetyUlipristalYuzpe

Identifiers

PMID26546020
PMCPMC6511980
OpenAlexW2156189787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.