ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2017
Visibility of Strings After Postplacental Intracesarean Insertion of CuT380A and Cu375 Intrauterine Contraceptive Device: A Randomized Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utilisation, effectiveness, and safety of immediate postpartum intrauterine device insertion: a systematic literature review.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2023Pooled it
- Expulsion of intrauterine devices after postpartum placement by timing of placement, delivery type, and intrauterine device type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020Pooled it
- Intrauterine Device Expulsion After Postpartum Placement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Pooled it
- Association of novel intra-cesarean post-placental intrauterine device insertion techniques, and early ultrasound, with expulsion rates and strings visibility: A prospective exploratory study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the incidence of visible strings after postplacental intracesarean insertion of Cu375 and CuT380A intrauterine contraceptive devices (IUD).
methodsThis was a prospective, randomized comparative study. A total of 100 women fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria underwent postplacental intracesarean insertion of either Cu375 IUD or CuT380A IUD. Women were followed up at 1, 6 weeks and 3 months after IUD insertion and were questioned about IUD expulsion or removal at each visit. The cervix was inspected to visualize the IUD strings. Data were analyzed by Chi-square test.
resultsAt 6-week follow-up, 97.9% women in group A versus 41.7% women in group B had strings visible at the cervical os and at 3 months 100% women in group A versus only 47.9% women in group B (
conclusionBoth Cu375 and CuT380A IUD are safe postpartum method of contraception but Cu375 if used for intracesarean IUD insertion increases the incidence of visible IUD strings. Hence, it avoids radiological investigations and invasive procedures at follow-up visits required to locate the IUD when strings are not visible.
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.