Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32164652›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2020

Effectiveness of the female condom in preventing HIV and sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alison B Wiyeh, Ruth K B Mome, Phetole W Mahasha, Eugene J Kongnyuy, Charles S Wiysonge

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. HIV infection.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2023
    Review
  20. 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 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Alison B WiyehCochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa. wberiliy@yahoo.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0417-3948
Ruth K B MomeOttumwa Regional Health Center, 1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, Ottumwa, IA, 52501, USA.
Phetole W MahashaCochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
Eugene J KongnyuySchool of Global Health and Bioethics, Euclid University, Banjul, Gambia.
Charles S WiysongeCochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
South African Medical Research Council · ZAEuclid University · GMOttumwa Regional Health Center · US

Funding

National Research Foundation of South Africa 106035
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effectiveness of female condoms for preventing HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) remains inconclusive. We examined the effects of female condoms on the acquisition of HIV and STIs.

methodsWe searched four databases, two trial registries, and reference lists of relevant publications in October 2018 and updated our search in February 2020. We screened search output, evaluated study eligibility, and extracted data in duplicate; resolving differences through discussion. We calculated the effective sample size of cluster randomised trials using an intra-cluster correlation coefficient of 0·03. Data from similar studies were combined in a meta-analysis. We performed a non-inferiority analysis of new condoms relative to marketed ones using a non-inferiority margin of 3%. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

resultsWe included fifteen studies of 6921 women. We found that polyurethane female condoms (FC1) plus male condoms may be as effective as male condoms only in reducing HIV acquisition (1 trial, n = 149 women, RR 0.07, 95%CI 0.00-1.38; low-certainty evidence). However, the use of FC1 plus male condoms is superior to male condoms alone in reducing the acquisition of gonorrhoea (2 trials, n = 790, RR 0.59, 95%CI 0.41-0.86; high-certainty evidence) and chlamydia (2 trials, n = 790, RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.47-0.94; high-certainty evidence). Adverse events and failure rates of FC1 were very low and decreased during follow up. Although the functionality of newer female condoms (Woman's, Cupid, Pheonurse, Velvet, and Reddy) may be non-inferior to FC2, there were no available studies assessing their efficacy in preventing HIV and STIs.

conclusionThe use of female plus male condoms is more effective than use of male condoms only in preventing STIs and may be as effective as the male condom only in preventing HIV. There is a need for well conducted studies assessing the effects of newer female condoms on HIV and STIs. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018090710.

Indexed as

FemaleHIV InfectionsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSexually Transmitted DiseasesSingle-Use Internal CondomFemale condomHIVSexually transmitted infectionsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID32164652
PMCPMC7068875
OpenAlexW3011138727

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.