ReviewF1000Research2018
Benefits of reversible contraception.
Review in F1000Research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genital inflammatory status and the innate immune response to contraceptive initiation.American journal of reproductive immunology (New York, N.Y. : 1989) · 2022Trial
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Lebanese women toward the use of oral contraceptive pills.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Non-daily contraception: Reinforcing the choice of users and addressing unmet needs of reproductive health.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Association between Female Reproductive Factors and Risk of Dementia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Predictors of long-acting contraceptive utilization hot spots in Ethiopia: using geographical weighted regression analysis.Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
- Supporting contraceptive self-care and reproductive empowerment with a digital health game in Barbados: Development and Pre-implementation study for What's My Method?Gates open research · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long-acting reversible contraception-intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants-offers the highest protection against unintended pregnancies. In addition, the use of reversible hormonal contraception has added health benefits for women in both the short and the long term. This review will give an overview of the benefits of reversible contraception as well as an evidence-based recommendation on how it should be used to benefit women the most.
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.