ArticleContraception2018
Comparing long-acting reversible contraception insertion rates in women with Medicaid vs. private insurance in a clinic with a two-visit protocol.
Article in Contraception, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex and female empowerment (SAFE): A randomized trial comparing sexual health interventions for women in treatment for opioid use disorder.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2021Trial
- Postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive adoption after a statewide initiative.Health services research · 2024Article
- Single-Visit Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Initiation Among Adolescents Before and During COVID-19.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024Article
- Same-day long-acting reversible contraceptive utilization after a statewide contraceptive access initiative.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2023Article
- Article
- Outcomes of a two-visit protocol for long acting reversible contraception for adolescents and young adults.Contraception · 2022Article
- Medicaid and receipt of interval postpartum long-acting reversible contraception.Contraception · 2019Article
- The Association of Public Insurance with Postpartum Contraception Preference and Provision.Open access journal of contraception · 2019Article
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
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined whether women with Medicaid are less likely to receive long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) in a clinic requiring two visits for insertion. STUDY
designLARC insertion and pregnancy rates were compared among women with Medicaid vs. private insurance, along with other predictors, in a retrospective chart review (N=447).
resultsUnivariately, fewer women with Medicaid vs. private insurance received LARC (66% vs. 79%, p<.01) and more become pregnant (18% vs. 6%, p<.001). Significant multivariate predictors of not receiving LARC were being unmarried and postpartum, both of which were associated with having Medicaid.
conclusionWomen with Medicaid are less likely than women with private insurance to have a requested LARC device inserted when a clinic requires two visits for insertion.
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.