Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29172767›Full record

ArticleJournal of health and social behavior2017

Contesting and Differentially Constructing Uncertainty: Negotiations of Contraceptive Use in the Clinical Encounter.

Krystale E Littlejohn, Katrina Kimport

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health and social behavior, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Attitudes Toward the Copper IUD in Sweden: A Survey Study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Krystale E Littlejohn1 Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Katrina Kimport2 University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Occidental College · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Development of a Decision Support Tool for ContraceptionK23HD067197 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DEHLENDORF, CHRISTINE E · 2011 to 2013
$380k
NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD067197
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most women of reproductive age have access to highly effective contraception, and all available methods are associated with side effects. Whether a woman will experience side effects is uncertain, however, which can pose challenges for clinicians who discuss the methods with patients. In this study, we analyze 102 contraceptive counseling visits to understand how clinicians discursively construct knowledge in the context of uncertainty. We find that while some present the uncertainty of side effects in a straightforward, patient-accessible way, others negotiate their predictions by (1) differentially constructing uncertainty, suggesting that positive side effects are likely and negative side effects are unlikely, and (2) contesting uncertainty, presenting the risk of serious side effects as controllable. In the end, these strategies deemphasize consideration of negative side effects in women's contraceptive decision making. Our results demonstrate the importance of elucidating the translation, instantiation, and construction of medical uncertainty both in theory and in practice.

Indexed as

Contraception BehaviorDecision MakingUncertaintyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPregnancyPregnancy, UnplannedYoung Adultcontraceptionriskside effectsuncertaintyunintended pregnancy

Identifiers

PMID29172767
PMCPMC6101241
OpenAlexW2766393927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.