ReviewBiology of reproduction2020
The new contraceptive revolution: developing innovative products outside of industry†,‡.
Review in Biology of reproduction, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Reversible female contraceptives: historical, current, and future perspectives†.Biology of reproduction · 2024Review
- The urgent need for innovation in contraception.Biology of reproduction · 2023Article
- Studying infant mortality: A demographic analysis based on data mining models.Open life sciences · 2023Article
- Women's preferences for a new contraceptive under development: an exploratory study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2023Article
- Application of exposure bracketing to streamline the development of contraceptive products.Contraception: X · 2022Article
- Comparison of Four Machine Learning Techniques for Prediction of Intensive Care Unit Length of Stay in Heart Transplantation Patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- A platform utilizingProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Multipurpose Prevention Technologies: Opportunities and Challenges to Ensure Advancement of the Most Promising MPTs.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2021Article
- Leveraging web search data in Germany to identify unmet needs of contraceptives on a population-based level: A longitudinal retrospective study.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A significant global unmet need for new contraceptive options for both women and men remains due to side effect profiles, medical concerns, and inconvenience of many currently available products. The pharmaceutical industry has largely abandoned early research and development for contraception and will not likely engage to bring new products to the market unless they have been significantly de-risked by showing promise in early phase clinical trials. This lack of interest by big pharma comes at a time when scientific and technological advances in biology and medicine are creating more opportunities than ever for the development of new and innovative drug products. Novel partnerships between the academic sector, small biotechnology companies, foundations, non-government organizations (NGOs), and the federal government could accelerate the development of new contraceptive products. We discuss the challenges and opportunities that we have encountered as an NGO with a mission to develop novel contraceptive products for low- and middle-income countries and how it differs from developing products for higher-income markets. We hope that our experiences and "lessons learned" will be of value to others as they proceed down the product development path, be it for female or male or for hormonal or nonhormonal contraceptives.
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.