ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2015
A comparison of the expected and actual pain experienced by women during insertion of an intrauterine contraceptive device.
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual function and wellbeing of women using modern contraceptive methods in Rwanda: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Do Women Feel Unprepared for the Experience of an Intrauterine Device Insertion: Findings From an Australian Study.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- Article
- The use of LNG-IUS-19.5 mg in daily gynecological routine practice in Germany: data from the Kyleena™ Satisfaction Study (KYSS).Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Observational
- Differing Approaches to Pain Management for Intrauterine Device Insertion and Maintenance: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the expected and actual pain experienced with the insertion of intrauterine contraception in women, and to determine whether either of these are related to their personal circumstances, or affected their satisfaction with the procedure.
designA convenience sample of 89 women aged 15-50 years attending a sexual health clinic for same day intrauterine contraception insertion were given a questionnaire that they completed following the procedure. The women were asked to rate their expectation of pain prior to insertion and to rate the actual pain they experienced immediately after insertion, on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being severe pain. Information on the women's circumstances and their level of satisfaction with the procedure was also obtained.
resultsOverall, the median actual pain experienced by women during insertion (4) was significantly lower than the expected pain median (6) (
conclusionAll women had a high expectation of pain prior to IUD insertion, but for those who had had a previous vaginal delivery, this was significantly greater than that actually experienced. Satisfaction levels overall were high. Counseling of women should take into account their expected pain prior to IUD insertion and consideration should be given to alternative and additional methods of pain relief in women who have not had a previous vaginal delivery.
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.