Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26855107›Full record

Trial reportObstetrics and gynecology2016

Association of Progestin Contraceptive Implant and Weight Gain.

Maria F Gallo, Jennifer Legardy-Williams, Tina Hylton-Kong, Carole Rattray, Athena P Kourtis, Denise J Jamieson, Markus J Steiner

Open access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Progestin-only contraceptives: effects on weight.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria F GalloDivision of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio; the Division of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; the Comprehensive Health Centre/Epidemiology Research and Training Unit and the University Hospital of the West Indies, the Ministry of Health, Kingston, Jamaica; and the Contraceptive Technology Innovation Division, FHI 360, Durham, North Carolina.
Jennifer Legardy-Williams
Tina Hylton-Kong
Carole Rattray
Athena P Kourtis
Denise J Jamieson
Markus J Steiner
The Centers · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

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

AdultContraceptive Agents, FemaleFemaleHumansProgestinsWeight GainContraceptive Agents, FemaleProgestins

Identifiers

PMID26855107
PMCPMC11264238
OpenAlexW2270681743

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.