ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2016
Accuracy of information about the intrauterine device on the Internet.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Women's knowledge about Intrauterine Device and user satisfaction in Brazil: a systematic review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Pooled it
- Online Misleading Information About Women's Reproductive Health: A Narrative Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Review
- Awareness, Knowledge, Attitude, and Source of Information on HIV Infection Among College Students.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- How and What Do Women Learn About Contraception? A Latent Class Analysis of Adolescents and Adult Women in Delaware.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Internet-Based Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health Services Among Colombian Youth: A Cross-Sectional Study.Hispanic health care international : the official journal of the National Association of Hispanic Nurses · 2024Article
- Description of the Content and Quality of Publicly Available Information on the Internet About Inhaled Volatile Anesthesia and Total Intravenous Anesthesia: Descriptive Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of information on the Internet regarding surgical mesh for hernia repair: analysis of websites found through three popular search engines.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Review
- Article
- Survey of nutrition knowledge of Kuwaiti health influencers in social media.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Communication on drug safety-related matters to patients: is it even more significant in this digital era?Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2020Article
- Knowledge about the intrauterine device and interest in using it among women users of primary care services.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2020Article
- Sexual Health and the Internet: Cross-Sectional Study of Online Preferences Among Adolescents.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntrauterine devices (IUDs) are highly effective methods of contraception, but use continues to lag behind less effective methods such as oral contraceptive pills and condoms. Women who are aware of the actual effectiveness of various contraceptive methods are more likely to choose the IUD. Conversely, women who are misinformed about the safety of IUDs may be less likely to use this method. Individuals increasingly use the Internet for health information. Information about IUDs obtained through the Internet may influence attitudes about IUD use among patients.
objectiveOur objective was to evaluate the quality of information about IUDs among World Wide Web sites providing contraceptive information to the public. STUDY
designWe developed a 56-item structured questionnaire to evaluate the quality of information about IUDs available through the Internet. We then conducted an online search to identify web sites containing information about contraception and IUDs using common search engines. The search was performed in August 2013 and web sites were reviewed again in October 2015 to ensure there were no substantial changes.
resultsOur search identified >2000 web sites, of which 108 were eligible for review; 105 (97.2%) of these sites contained information about IUDs. Of sites, 86% provided at least 1 mechanism of the IUD. Most web sites accurately reported advantages of the IUD including that it is long acting (91%), highly effective (82%), and reversible (68%). However, only 30% of sites explicitly indicated that IUDs are safe. Fifty percent (n = 53) of sites contained inaccurate information about the IUD such as an increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease beyond the insertion month (27%) or that women in nonmonogamous relationships (30%) and nulliparous women (20%) are not appropriate candidates. Among sites, 44% stated that a mechanism of IUDs is prevention of implantation of a fertilized egg. Only 3% of web sites incorrectly stated that IUDs are an abortifacient. More than a quarter of sites listed an inaccurate contraindication to the IUD such as nulliparity, history of pelvic inflammatory disease, or history of an ectopic pregnancy.
conclusionThe quality of information about IUDs available on the Internet is variable. Accurate information was mixed with inaccurate or outdated information that could perpetuate myths about IUDs. Clinicians need knowledge about accurate, evidence-based Internet resources to provide to women given the inconsistent quality of information available through online sources.
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.