ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2020
Different Perceptions among Women and Their Physicians Regarding Contraceptive Counseling: Results from the TANCO Survey in Brazil.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- Contraindicated use of modern contraceptives among mothers from a Pelotas Birth Cohort.Revista de saude publica · 2024Article
- Progestogen-only oral contraceptives.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe optimal use of contraceptive methods requires that women participate in targeted choice of methods that meet their individual needs and expectations. The Thinking About Needs in Contraception (TANCO) study is a quantitative online survey of the views of health professionals and women on aspects of contraceptive counseling and contraceptive use.
methodsPhysicians and women attending clinics for contraception were invited to complete online questionnaires. The research explored the knowledge and use of contraceptive methods, satisfaction with the current method and interest in receiving more information on all methods. Aspects related to contraceptive practice among physicians were gathered in parallel. The results obtained in the Brazilian research were compared with those of the European research, which involved 11 countries.
resultsThere was a high prevalence of contraceptive use and general satisfaction with the current method. A total of 63% of the women were using short-acting contraceptive (SAC) methods, and 9% were using a long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC). Sixty-six percent of women were interested in receiving more information on all methods; 69% of women said they would consider LARC if they received more comprehensive information about it. Health professionals tend to underestimate the interest of women in receiving information about contraception in general, and more specifically about LARCs.
conclusionDespite the high levels of use and satisfaction with the current methods, women were interested in receiving more information on all contraceptive methods. Structured contraceptive counseling based on individual needs and expectations may lead to greater knowledge and a greater likelihood of proper contraceptive choice.
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.