ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2020
Knowledge about the intrauterine device and interest in using it among women users of primary care services.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Women's knowledge about Intrauterine Device and user satisfaction in Brazil: a systematic review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Pooled it
- Factors influencing an intention to use intrauterine device among family planning users in Southwestern Ethiopia.Primary health care research & development · 2026Article
- Inequalities in the health care system utilization for intrauterine device insertion.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2026Article
- Healthcare providers' perceptions on post abortion intrauterine contraception: A qualitative study in central Uganda.PloS one · 2024Article
- Reproductive Planning and the Choice of Long-acting Reversible Contraceptive Primary to Health: A Cross-Sectional Study.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2023Article
- Outcomes of Intrauterine Device Insertion by Certified Midwives and Obstetric Nurse Practitioners.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2023Article
- Willingness to pay for short- and long-acting contraceptives among female adolescents and their parents in Brazil:a pilot study.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto analyze the level of knowledge about the intrauterine device, the interest in using it and the relationship between these events among women in reproductive age.
methodcross-sectional study conducted with 1858 women between 18 and 49 years old, attending Primary Health Care Facilities. Data were obtained in face-to-face interviews. The level of knowledge was evaluated by items with answers options "agree", "disagree" and "I don't know". Knowledge was categorized as below/equal and above the median. Chi-square and multiple logistic regression were used in Stata 14.2 (95% confidence level).
resultsintrauterine device current use was not frequent (1.7%; n=32) and the level of knowledge was higher among women between 25 and 34 years old, white, living in Aracaju (Sergipe), who were more educated, and who were currently using or had already used the intrauterine device. Interest in using the intrauterine device (38.0%; n=634) was higher among younger women, single, more educated, had health insurance, no children and with higher level of knowledge about the intrauterine device.
conclusionthe level of knowledge about the intrauterine device was associated with the interest in using it.
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.