Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27567593›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016

Progestin-only contraceptives: effects on weight.

Laureen M Lopez, Shanthi Ramesh, Mario Chen, Alison Edelman, Conrad Otterness, James Trussell, Frans M Helmerhorst

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
16.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 224 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Approach to sport-savvy contraceptive counselling for athletes.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2026
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Laureen M LopezClinical and Epidemiological Sciences, FHI 360, 359 Blackwell St, Suite 200, Durham, North Carolina, USA, 27701.
Shanthi Ramesh
Mario Chen
Alison Edelman
Conrad Otterness
James Trussell
Frans M Helmerhorst
Family Health International 360 · USLeiden University Medical Center · NLOregon Health & Science University · USPrinceton University · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Infrastructure for Population Research at PrincetonR24HD047879 · NICHD · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI MASSEY, DOUGLAS S · 2004 to 2013
$7.3M
Scientific and Technical Computing CoreP2CHD047879 · NICHD · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI SALGANIK, MATTHEW J. · 2014 to 2018
$2.0M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD047879NICHD NIH HHS R24HD047879
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProgestin-only contraceptives (POCs) are appropriate for many women who cannot or should not take estrogen. POCs include injectables, intrauterine contraception, implants, and oral contraceptives. Many POCs are long-acting, cost-effective methods of preventing pregnancy. However, concern about weight gain can deter the initiation of contraceptives and cause early discontinuation among users.

objectivesThe primary objective was to evaluate the association between progestin-only contraceptive use and changes in body weight. SEARCH

methodsUntil 4 August 2016, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. For the initial review, we contacted investigators to identify other trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered comparative studies that examined a POC versus another contraceptive method or no contraceptive. The primary outcome was mean change in body weight or mean change in body composition. We also considered the dichotomous outcome of loss or gain of a specified amount of weight. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted the data. Non-randomized studies (NRS) need to control for confounding factors. We used adjusted measures for the primary effects in NRS or the results of matched analysis from paired samples. If the report did not provide adjusted measures for the primary analysis, we used unadjusted outcomes. For RCTs and NRS without adjusted measures, we computed the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous variables. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI. MAIN

resultsWe found 22 eligible studies that included a total of 11,450 women. With 6 NRS added to this update, the review includes 17 NRS and 5 RCTs. By contraceptive method, the review has 16 studies of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), 4 of levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine contraception (LNG-IUC), 5 for implants, and 2 for progestin-only pills.Comparison groups did not differ significantly for weight change or other body composition measure in 15 studies. Five studies with moderate or low quality evidence showed differences between study arms. Two studies of a six-rod implant also indicated some differences, but the evidence was low quality.Three studies showed differences for DMPA users compared with women not using a hormonal method. In a retrospective study, weight gain (kg) was greater for DMPA versus copper (Cu) IUC in years one (MD 2.28, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.77), two (MD 2.71, 95% CI 2.12 to 3.30), and three (MD 3.17, 95% CI 2.51 to 3.83). A prospective study showed adolescents using DMPA had a greater increase in body fat (%) compared with a group not using a hormonal method (MD 11.00, 95% CI 2.64 to 19.36). The DMPA group also had a greater decrease in lean body mass (%) (MD -4.00, 95% CI -6.93 to -1.07). A more recent retrospective study reported greater mean increases with use of DMPA versus Cu IUC for weight (kg) at years 1 (1.3 vs 0.2), 4 (3.5 vs 1.9), and 10 (6.6 vs 4.9).Two studies reported a greater mean increase in body fat mass (%) for POC users versus women not using a hormonal method. The method was LNG-IUC in two studies (reported means 2.5 versus -1.3; P = 0.029); (MD 1.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.75). One also studied a desogestrel-containing pill (MD 3.30, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.52). Both studies showed a greater decrease in lean body mass among POC users. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe considered the overall quality of evidence to be low; more than half of the studies had low quality evidence. The main reasons for downgrading were lack of randomizations (NRS) and high loss to follow-up or early discontinuation.These 22 studies showed limited evidence of change in weight or body composition with use of POCs. Mean weight gain at 6 or 12 months was less than 2 kg (4.4 lb) for most studies. Those with multiyear data showed mean weight change was approximately twice as much at two to four years than at one year, but generally the study groups did not differ significantly. Appropriate counseling about typical weight gain may help reduce discontinuation of contraceptives due to perceptions of weight gain.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultBody CompositionBody WeightContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDrug ImplantsFemaleHumansIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedLevonorgestrelMedroxyprogesterone AcetateProgestinsProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesWeight GainContraceptives, Oral, HormonalDrug ImplantsLevonorgestrelMedroxyprogesterone AcetateProgestins

Identifiers

PMID27567593
PMCPMC5034734
OpenAlexW2144592448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.