Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27745552›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2016

Does mode of follow-up influence contraceptive use after medical abortion in a low-resource setting? Secondary outcome analysis of a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

Mandira Paul, Sharad D Iyengar, Birgitta Essén, Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson, Kirti Iyengar, Johan Bring, Marie Klingberg-Allvin

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01827995 (Simplified Medical Abortion in Rural India), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01827995 phase4completednot on this map

Simplified Medical Abortion in Rural India

TypeinterventionalSponsorKarolinska InstitutetRan2013 to 2014Enrolled731ConditionsPregnancyArmsSelf assessment, Routine assessment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Mandira PaulDepartment of Women's and Children's health / International Maternal and Child Health (IMCH), Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala, SE-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden. mandira.paul@kbh.uu.se.ORCID 0000-0002-5841-5984
Sharad D IyengarAction Research & Training for Health (ARTH), 313011, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Birgitta EssénDepartment of Women's and Children's health / International Maternal and Child Health (IMCH), Uppsala University, Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala, SE-751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.
Kristina Gemzell-DanielssonDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Division of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, WHO collaborating Centre, SE-17176, Stockholm, Sweden.
Kirti IyengarAction Research & Training for Health (ARTH), 313011, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Johan BringStatisticon, SE-10136, Stockholm, Sweden.
Marie Klingberg-AllvinStatisticon, SE-10136, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPost-abortion contraceptive use in India is low and the use of modern methods of contraception is rare, especially in rural areas. This study primarily compares contraceptive use among women whose abortion outcome was assessed in-clinic with women who assessed their abortion outcome at home, in a low-resource, primary health care setting. Moreover, it investigates how background characteristics and abortion service provision influences contraceptive use post-abortion.

methodsA randomized controlled, non-inferiority, trial (RCT) compared clinic follow-up with home-assessment of abortion outcome at 2 weeks post-abortion. Additionally, contraceptive-use at 3 months post-abortion was investigated through a cross-sectional follow-up interview with a largely urban sub-sample of women from the RCT. Women seeking abortion with a gestational age of up to 9 weeks and who agreed to a 2-week follow-up were included (n = 731). Women with known contraindications to medical abortions, Hb < 85 mg/l and aged below 18 were excluded. Data were collected between April 2013 and August 2014 in six primary health-care clinics in Rajasthan. A computerised random number generator created the randomisation sequence (1:1) in blocks of six. Contraceptive use was measured at 2 weeks among women successfully followed-up (n = 623) and 3 months in the sub-set of women who were included if they were recruited at one of the urban study sites, owned a phone and agreed to a 3-month follow-up (n = 114).

resultsThere were no differences between contraceptive use and continuation between study groups at 3 months (76 % clinic follow-up, 77 % home-assessment), however women in the clinic follow-up group were most likely to adopt a contraceptive method at 2 weeks (62 ± 12 %), while women in the home-assessment group were most likely to adopt a method after next menstruation (60 ± 13 %). Fifty-two per cent of women who initiated a method at 2 weeks chose the 3-month injection or the copper intrauterine device. Only 4 % of women preferred sterilization. Caste, educational attainment, or type of residence did not influence contraceptive use.

conclusionsSimplified follow-up after early medical abortion will not change women's opportunities to access contraception in a low-resource setting, if contraceptive services are provided as intra-abortion services as early as on day one. Women's postabortion contraceptive use at 3 months is unlikely to be affected by mode of followup after medical abortion, also in a low-resource setting. Clinical guidelines need to encourage intra-abortion contraception, offering the full spectrum of evidence-based methods, especially long-acting reversible methods.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01827995.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsHome Care ServicesAbortion, InducedAdolescentAdultAftercareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesContraceptionContraceptive AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIndiaMiddle AgedPregnancyContraceptive Agents

Identifiers

PMID27745552
PMCPMC5066281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.