ArticleContraception2016
Moving towards the goals of FP2020 - classifying contraceptives.
Article in Contraception, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of postpartum contraceptive use among women in low- and middle-income countries.Reproductive health · 2019Pooled it
- "Now that they come to our doorsteps to teach us these things…" - Postpartum contraception outcomes from a pre-post effectiveness-implementation study of an integrated community health worker intervention in rural Nepal.Reproductive health · 2025Trial
- The effect of a postpartum intrauterine device programme on choice of contraceptive method in Tanzania: a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized trial.Health policy and planning · 2023Trial
- TEAM-UP: Mixed-Methods Data for Understanding Traditional and Modern Contraceptive Use Dynamics in Four Sub-Saharan African Countries.Studies in family planning · 2026Article
- Article
- Family planning exemplar country selection methodology: time lag and trends analysis.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Methodological Innovations for Evidencing and Estimating Modern and Traditional Contraceptive Prevalence and Use Dynamics in Sub-Saharan Africa.Studies in family planning · 2026Article
- Long-term perspectives of Muslim and Christian religious leaders on an educational intervention about family planning in Tanzania.Global public health · 2025Article
- Discontinuation, switching and contraceptive failure patterns of long-acting reversible contraceptive users in Kenya: a quantitative study.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
- Contraceptive Concordance.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- Measuring Informed Choice for Contraception in Burkina Faso: Comparing self-rated and researcher-ascribed measures.Social indicators research · 2025Article
- Kenya's 2010 abortion law impacts contraceptive use and fertility rates.Reproductive health · 2025Article
- Article
- The role of restrictive abortion laws on modern contraceptive use in Sub Saharan Africa.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Factors associated with family planning use among refugee and host populations in Adjumani district, West Nile, Uganda: a comparative study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Perceptions of access to long-acting reversible contraception removal among women in Burkina Faso.Contraception · 2024Article
- Article
- Health care and contraceptive decision-making autonomy and use of female sterilisation among married women in Malawi.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
- Contraindicated use of modern contraceptives among mothers from a Pelotas Birth Cohort.Revista de saude publica · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
With the renewed focus on family planning, a clear and transparent understanding is needed for the consistent classification of contraceptives, especially in the commonly used modern/traditional system. The World Health Organization Department of Reproductive Health and Research and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) therefore convened a technical consultation in January 2015 to address issues related to classifying contraceptives. The consultation defined modern contraceptive methods as having a sound basis in reproductive biology, a precise protocol for correct use and evidence of efficacy under various conditions based on appropriately designed studies. Methods in country programs like Fertility Awareness Based Methods [such as Standard Days Method (SDM) and TwoDay Method], Lactational Amenorrhea Method (LAM) and emergency contraception should be reported as modern. Herbs, charms and vaginal douching are not counted as contraceptive methods as they have no scientific basis in preventing pregnancy nor are in country programs. More research is needed on defining and measuring use of emergency contraceptive methods, to reflect their contribution to reducing unmet need. The ideal contraceptive classification system should be simple, easy to use, clear and consistent, with greater parsimony. Measurement challenges remain but should not be the driving force to determine what methods are counted or reported as modern or not. Family planning programs should consider multiple attributes of contraceptive methods (e.g., level of effectiveness, need for program support, duration of labeled use, hormonal or nonhormonal) to ensure they provide a variety of methods to meet the needs of women and men.
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.