ArticleReproductive health2020
ENG-releasing subdermal implants in postpartum teenagers - an open-label trial study protocol.
Article in Reproductive health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Benefits of Contraceptives Implants: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHigher than expected adolescent pregnancy high rates continue globally, with repeated unplanned pregnancy (UP) in this age group is a public health problem. In Brazil, 16% of pregnancies occur in adolescents under 18 years old, with high maternal morbidity and mortality rates in this age group. Effective and safe contraception is required to reduce UP rates. The objective of our study is to evaluate acceptance of etonogestrel (ENG)-releasing subdermal contraceptive implant after childbirth, before discharge, as well as clinical performance up to one year after placement. Comparison between teenagers who opt for ENG-implant versus other contraceptive methods after childbirth will be also evaluated, specifically regarding UP, continuation and discontinuation rates and reasons, body composition, pelvic ultrasound characteristics and user satisfaction.
methodsA non-randomized open-label trial will be conducted with teenagers after childbirth and followed up to one year at the Women's Hospital, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. The study group will consist of patients who accepted to use ENG-implant and placed before discharge. The comparison group will include adolescents who choose to use other contraceptive methods at the first postpartum visit (42 ± 3 days after childbirth). All women will follow-up at 40-60 days postpartum, as well as, at 6 and 12 months post-enrollment. Patient satisfaction, contraceptive effectiveness, reasons of discontinuation, continuation rate and body composition will be evaluated. Transvaginal ultrasound and electric bio impedance tests will be performed at all follow-up appointments. A 5% significance level was assumed, as well as, a sampling error (absolute) for 10% prevalence. The sample size was calculated at n = 100, obtaining an estimate of 50 to 70 adolescents who would accept the method offered, according to the prevalence and sample error assumed. DISCUSSION: Long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods include subdermal implants and intrauterine contraceptives, are considered first line contraception for teenagers. Immediate postpartum use is a safe option, which significantly reduces rates of repeated UP and all the undesirable consequences inherent to this process.
trial registrationThis study was approved by the Ethics and Research Commission of UNICAMP (CAAE: 92869018.5.0000.5404) and the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (REBEC): http://www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-4z7bc6, (number 2.901.752).
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.