Trial reportObstetrics and gynecology2016
Association of Progestin Contraceptive Implant and Weight Gain.
Trial report in Obstetrics and gynecology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progestin-only contraceptives: effects on weight.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Contraceptive-Induced Weight Gain-Myth and Reality Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Genetic variation associated with side effects of hormonal contraception exposure: a narrative review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Early removal of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant in Spanish women: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Weight change among women using intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper intrauterine device, or a levonorgestrel implant for contraception did not influence early discontinuation.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Weight change among women using intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate, a copper intrauterine device, or a levonorgestrel implant for contraception: Findings from a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2021Article
- Contraception in chronic kidney disease: a best practice position statement by the Kidney and Pregnancy Group of the Italian Society of Nephrology.Journal of nephrology · 2020Article
- An exploratory analysis on the influence of genetic variants on weight gain among etonogestrel contraceptive implant users.Contraception · 2020Article
- Assessing Weight Status in Adolescent and Young Adult Users of the Etonogestrel Contraceptive Implant.Journal of pediatric and adolescent gynecology · 2019Article
- New developments in long-acting reversible contraception: the promise of intrauterine devices and implants to improve family planning services.Fertility and sterility · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate initiation of a two-rod, 150-mg levonorgestrel contraceptive implant on women's perceived and observed body weight.
methodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of data from an open, randomized controlled trial of adult, nonpregnant, human immunodeficiency virus-negative women attending a public clinic in Kingston, Jamaica, who were assigned to initiate implant use either immediately or after a 3-month delay. The primary objective of the parent study was to assess the effect of initiation of the implant on the frequency of condom use. We compared study arms during follow-up using one-sided χ tests for differences in perceived weight gain and loss, one-sided Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests for median gain in measured weight, and logistic regression with generalized estimating equations for risk of gaining greater than 2 kg.
resultsFrom 2012 to 2014, women were assigned to the implant (n=208) or delay arm (n=206). At 3 months, more women in the implant arm (15.3%) reported perceived weight gain than in the control arm (4.3%) (P=.01). Despite differences in perception, the implant and control arms did not differ significantly in median weight gain at 1-month (0.0 kg and 0.0 kg, respectively; P=.44) and 3-month visits (0.5 kg and 0.0 kg, respectively; P=.27). Study arms did not differ in risk of gaining greater than 2 kg (odds ratio 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.6-1.3).
conclusionWe found no evidence of weight gain from short-term implant use. Through the power of the nocebo effect, the practice of counseling women to expect possible weight gain from initiating implant use could lead them to perceive weight gain even in its absence and contribute to the early discontinuation of this highly effective contraceptive method.
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.