Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27059507›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2016

Combined hormonal contraception use in reproductive-age women with contraindications to estrogen use.

Julianne R Lauring, Erik B Lehman, Timothy A Deimling, Richard S Legro, Cynthia H Chuang

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julianne R LauringDivision of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA. Electronic address: jlauring@hmc.psu.edu.
Erik B LehmanDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA.
Timothy A DeimlingDivision of Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA.
Richard S LegroDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA.
Cynthia H ChuangDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA.
Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · US

Funding

Penn State Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR002014 · NCATS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV HERSHEY MED CTR · PI KRASCHNEWSKI, JENNIFER L. · 2016 to 2025
$33.7M
Penn State Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000127 · NCATS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV HERSHEY MED CTR · PI SINOWAY, LAWRENCE I · 2012 to 2015
$17.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000127NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use recommends that combined hormonal contraceptives (ie, birth control pills, contraceptive patch, vaginal ring) should be avoided in women with specific medical conditions because of the increased risk of cardiovascular events associated with estrogen use. Whether women with category 3 (theoretical or proven risk usually outweigh the advantages) or category 4 (unacceptable health risk) contraindications are appropriately avoiding estrogen-containing combined hormonal contraceptives is unknown.

objectiveWe describe the prevalence of combined hormonal contraceptive use among a sample of reproductive-age women with medical contraindications to estrogen use. Our hypothesis was that women with categories 3 and 4 contraindications would use estrogen-containing contraception less often than women without medical contraindications. We also explored whether inappropriate estrogen-containing contraceptive use is related to contraceptive provider characteristics. STUDY

designData are from the baseline survey of the MyNewOptions study, which included privately insured women residing in Pennsylvania aged 18-40 years, who were sexually active and not intending pregnancy in the next year. Women were surveyed about their medical conditions, contraceptive use, and characteristics of their contraceptive provider. Women were considered to have a contraindication to combined hormonal contraceptives if they reported a category 3 or category 4 contraindication: hypertension, smokers older than age 35 years, a history of venous thromboembolism, diabetes with complications, coronary artery disease, systemic lupus erythematosus with antiphospholipid antibodies, breast cancer, or migraine headaches with aura. χ(2) tests for general association were used to compare combined hormonal contraceptives use, contraceptive health provider characteristics, and sociodemographic data in women with and without contraindications to estrogen use.

resultsThe MyNewOptions baseline study sample included 987 adult women who were mostly young (46% were 18-25 years), white (94%), employed (70%), and married or cohabiting (54%). Thirteen percent (n = 130) of the sample had a medical contraindication to estrogen-containing contraceptive use: migraine with aura (81%) was the most common contraindication, followed by smokers older than age 35 years (7%), hypertension (11%), history of venous thromboembolism (4%), and diabetes with complications (2%). High use of combined hormonal contraceptives was reported among the women with medical contraindications to estrogen at 39% (n = 51). This was not statistically different from women without a medical contraindication (47%, P = .1). Among the 130 women with a contraindication, whether they did or did not use an estrogen-containing contraceptive did not vary by education level, income, or weight category. With respect to their contraceptive prescribers, there were no differences in prescriber specialty, provider type, or clinic type comparing women using and not using an estrogen-containing contraceptive.

conclusionAmong this study sample of reproductive-age women, there was a high rate of combined hormonal contraceptive use in women with a medical contraindication to estrogen use. These women may be at an increased risk for cardiovascular events. Processes need to be improved to ensure that women with medical contraindications to estrogen-containing contraception are being offered the safest and most effective methods, including long-acting reversible contraceptives, such as intrauterine devices and the contraceptive implant.

Indexed as

Contraception BehaviorSmokingAdolescentAdultAge FactorsContraceptionContraceptives, Oral, CombinedContraindicationsFemaleHumansHypertensionMigraine with AuraPennsylvaniaPregnancyYoung AdultContraceptives, Oral, Combinedcombined hormonal contraceptionmedical contraindications

Identifiers

PMID27059507
PMCPMC5861494
OpenAlexW2324104922

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.