Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31992295›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2020

Exploring young women's reasons for adopting intrauterine or oral emergency contraception in the United States: a qualitative study.

Shelly Kaller, Aisha Mays, Lori Freedman, Cynthia C Harper, M Antonia Biggs

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Barriers to contraception access and use among youth: A scoping review in high-income countries.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Contraception Initiation in the Emergency Department: Adolescent Perspectives.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Changes in U.S. Healthcare Provider Practices Related to Emergency Contraception.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shelly KallerAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA. shelly.kaller@ucsf.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6648-7064
Aisha MaysAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Lori FreedmanAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Cynthia C HarperBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 3333 California St, Suite 335, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
M Antonia BiggsAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100, Oakland, CA, 94612, USA.
Ibis Reproductive Health · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 2014-9796
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent focus on increasing access to long-acting reversible contraceptive methods has often overlooked the diverse reasons why women may choose less effective methods even when significant access barriers have been removed. While the copper intrauterine device (IUD) is considered an acceptable alternative to emergency contraception pills (ECPs), it is unclear to what extent low rates of provision and use are due to patient preferences versus structural access barriers. This study explores factors that influence patients' choice between ECPs and the copper IUD as EC, including prior experiences with contraception and attitudes toward EC methods, in settings where both options are available at no cost.

methodsWe telephone-interviewed 17 patients seeking EC from three San Francisco Bay Area youth-serving clinics that offered the IUD as EC and ECPs as standard practice, regarding their experiences choosing an EC method. We thematically coded all interview transcripts, then summarized the themes related to reasons for choosing ECPs or the IUD as EC.

resultsTen participants left their EC visit with ECPs and seven with the IUD as EC option. Women chose ECPs because they were familiar and easily accessible. Reasons for not adopting the copper IUD included having had prior negative experiences with the IUD, concerns about its side effects and the placement procedure, and lack of awareness about the copper IUD. Women who chose the IUD as EC did so primarily because of its long-term efficacy, invisibility, lack of hormones, longer window of post-coital utility, and a desire to not rely on ECPs. Women who chose the IUD as EC had not had prior negative experiences with the IUD, had already been interested in the IUD, and were ready and able to have it placed that day.

conclusionsThis study highlights that women have varied and well-considered reasons for choosing each EC method. Both ECPs and the copper IUD are important and acceptable EC options, each with their own features offering benefits to patients. Efforts to destigmatize repeated use of ECPs and validate women's choice of either EC method are needed to support women in their EC method decision-making.

Indexed as

Intrauterine Devices, CopperPatient PreferenceAdolescentAdultAttitudeContraception, PostcoitalDecision MakingFemaleHumansLong-Acting Reversible ContraceptionQualitative ResearchUnited StatesYoung AdultEmergency contraceptionIntrauterine deviceIUDLong-acting reversible contraception, women’s health, qualitative research

Identifiers

PMID31992295
PMCPMC6986082
OpenAlexW3006821212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.