ArticleHawai'i journal of health & social welfare2020
Survival Analysis of Patient Contraceptive Choice Method at Time of Abortion - Honolulu, Hawai'i, May 2010-December 2016.
Article in Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The relationship between contraceptive method choice at the time of abortion and risk for subsequent abortions is not well understood. This article uses an existing data set from the University of Hawai'i Women's Options Center between May 2010 and December 2016 to examine if such a relationship exists. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression survival analysis was used to evaluate contraceptive method prescribed or provided at index abortion encounters and likelihood of additional abortions. Patients who received a prescription of oral contraceptive pills, patches or rings at their index abortion were 61% more likely to have an additional abortion than those who had no contraceptive method recorded (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-2.28). Patients who received a long-acting reversible contraceptive method at their index abortion were 59% less likely to have an additional abortion when compared with a patient receiving no method (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.20-0.86). The findings show that patients who were prescribed oral contraceptives pills, patches, or rings were more likely than patients who had no contraceptive method prescribed or provided to have more than one abortion during the data collection period. Contraceptive method choice at time of abortion is complex and providers should be thorough in their counseling about failure rates, while also remaining vigilant in supporting patient autonomy and avoiding coercive or stigmatizing language.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32914094PMC7477704What 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.