ArticlePloS one2019
Women's views about contraception requirements for biomedical research participation.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 21 papers, 2 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of Pregnancy Events in Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials in Sub-Saharan Africa: Implications for Gender Transformative Trials.AIDS and behavior · 2024Pooled it
- Ethical considerations for research involving pregnant women living with HIV and their young children: a systematic review of the empiric literature and discussion.BMC medical ethics · 2021Pooled it
- Unintended drug exposure during pregnancy in clinical trials - a survey in early drug development.International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Trial
- Ethical complexities in contraceptive mandates for adolescent clinical trial participation: a qualitative analysis of U.S. adolescents' perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Balancing solidarity, normality and trust: reasons for (non-)participation in an injectable HIV antiretroviral therapy study in the United Kingdom.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Contraception Requirements in Early Clinical Trials: Considerations Towards an Evidence-Based Approach.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2025Review
- Sex-based differences in nuclear medicine imaging and therapy.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023Article
- The impact of gender and sex on diagnosis, treatment outcomes and health-related quality of life in patients with axial spondyloarthritis.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Review
- Ethical considerations around volunteer payments in a malaria human infection study in Kenya: an embedded empirical ethics study.BMC medical ethics · 2022Article
- Facilitators and barriers of women's participation in HIV clinical research in Switzerland: A qualitative study.HIV medicine · 2022Article
- Where are the pregnant and breastfeeding women in new pre-exposure prophylaxis trials? The imperative to overcome the evidence gap.The lancet. HIV · 2022Review
- Ending the evidence gap for pregnancy, HIV and co-infections: ethics guidance from the PHASES project.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Article
- A retrospective analysis of incident pregnancy in phase 1 and 2a HIV-1 vaccine study participants does not support concern for adverse pregnancy or birth outcomes.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Contraception methods used among women with HIV starting antiretroviral therapy in a large United States clinical trial, 2009-2011.Contraception · 2021Article
- Impact of dedicated women's outreach workers (WOWs) on recruitment of women in ACTG clinical studies.HIV research & clinical practice · 2021Article
- The HIV drug optimization agenda: promoting standards for earlier investigation and approvals of antiretroviral drugs for use in adolescents living with HIV.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Article
- Correction: Women's views about contraception requirements for biomedical research participation.PloS one · 2019Article
- Black women in HIV research: Intersectionality, positionality and our commitment to build a just research enterprise.Women's health (London, England)Article
- Exclusion of Women from Phase I Trials: Perspectives from Investigators and Research Oversight Officials.Ethics & human researchArticle
- Exclusion of Reproductive-aged Women in COVID-19 Vaccination and Clinical Trials.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's HealthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The scientific and ethical importance of including women of reproductive age in biomedical research is widely acknowledged. Concerns about preventing fetal exposure to research interventions have motivated requirements for contraception among reproductive aged women in biomedical studies-often irrespective of risks and benefits or a woman's actual potential for pregnancy, raising important questions about when such requirements are appropriate. The perspectives of women themselves on these issues are largely unexplored. We conducted 140 interviews, 70 in the U.S. and 70 in Malawi, with women either living with or at-risk for HIV, exploring their views about the practice of requiring contraception in clinical trials. A majority of women interviewed from both countries indicated overall support for the practice, with seven themes characterizing advantages and disadvantages raised: reproductive control, health effects, prevention of fetal harm, burden on women, deferral to authority, autonomy regarding enrollment and birth control method, and relationship concerns. While women in the US frequently raised prevention of fetal harm as a key advantage, many other positives noted by women in both countries were related to contraception use in general, not specific to a trial context. With regard to disadvantages, U.S. women tended to focus on biomedical risks such as side effects and impact on fertility, whereas Malawian women focused on the social risks of contraception requirements, including violations of trust in marital relations and suspicions of potential infidelity. Given the potential benefits and burdens highlighted, contraception in research should be sensitive to actual fetal risk assessments; directed where justified at optimizing effective pregnancy prevention; responsive to women's reproductive preferences; and made available as an ancillary benefit even where risk thresholds do not justify requirement-in order to facilitate trials that are both ethical and robustly oriented around the interests and lives of women who will participate in them.
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.