ArticleBiology of reproduction2020
HIV, progestins, genital epithelial barrier function, and the burden of objectivity†.
Article 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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Exogenous ephrin-A3 reverses loss of vaginal epithelial barrier protection in progestin-treated mice.Mucosal immunology · 2025Article
- Ephrin-Eph signaling: an important regulator of epithelial integrity and barrier function.Tissue barriers · 2025Review
- Genital epithelial barrier function is conserved by intravaginal rings releasing etonogestrel and ethinyl estradiol.Tissue barriers · 2024Article
- Effect of progestin-based contraceptives on HIV-associated vaginal immune biomarkers and microbiome in adolescent girls.PloS one · 2024Article
- Ovariectomized mice and postmenopausal women exhibit analogous loss of genital epithelial integrity.Tissue barriers · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Contributions from a diverse set of scientific disciplines will be needed to help individuals make fully informed decisions regarding contraceptive choices least likely to promote HIV susceptibility. This commentary recaps contrasting interpretations of results from the Evidence for Contraceptive Options and HIV Outcomes (ECHO) Trial, a study that compared HIV risk in women using the progestin-only injectable contraceptive depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) vs. two other contraceptive choices. It also summarizes results from basic and translational research that establish biological plausibility for earlier clinical studies that identified enhanced HIV susceptibility in women using DMPA.
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.