Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33005125›Full record

ReviewThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2020

Male Contraception.

Carmen R Abbe, Stephanie T Page, Arthi Thirumalai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Vasectomy Procedures on the Rise in France From 2010 to 2022.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Kidney disease and reproductive health.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Prevalence of vasectomy and tubal ligation: time series analysis Brazil, 2006-2019.Epidemiologia e servicos de saude : revista do Sistema Unico de Saude do Brasil · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Hormone Regulation in Testicular Development and Function.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Non-Hormonal Contraception.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Carmen R AbbeDivision of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Stephanie T PageDivision of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Arthi ThirumalaiDivision of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

Funding

Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism Training ProgramT32DK007247 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI GREGORY J MORTON, KRISTINA Marie UTZSCHNEIDER · 1986 to 2026
$10.0M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK007247
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Unintended pregnancy is a global public health problem. Despite a variety of female contraceptive options, male contraceptive options are limited to the condom and vasectomy. Condoms have high failure rates and surgical vasectomy is not reliably reversible. There is a global need and desire for novel male contraceptive methods. Hormonal methods have progressed the furthest in clinical development and androgen plus progestin formulations hold promise as a marketable, reversible male contraceptive over the next decade. Investigators have tested androgen plus progestin approaches using oral, transdermal, subdermal, and injectable drug formulations and demonstrated the short-term safety and reversibility of hormonal male contraception. The most commonly reported side effects associated with hormonal male contraception include weight gain, acne, slight suppression of serum high-density cholesterol, mood changes, and changes in libido. Efficacy trials of hormonal male contraceptives have demonstrated contraceptive efficacy rates greater than that of condoms. Although there has been less progression in the development of nonhormonal male contraceptives, potentially reversible vaso-occlusive methods are currently in clinical trials in some countries. Various studies have confirmed both men and women's desire for novel male contraceptives. Barriers to development include an absence of investment from pharmaceutical companies, concerns regarding side effects and spermatogenic rebound with hormonal methods, and lack of clear reversibility and proven effectiveness of nonhormonal methods. The ultimate availability of male contraceptives could have an important impact on decreasing global unintended pregnancy rates (currently 40% of all pregnancies) and will be a step towards reproductive justice and greater equity in family planning.

Indexed as

ContraceptionFamily Planning ServicesFemaleHumansMalePregnancyBirth ControlContraceptionMale ContraceptionReproduction

Identifiers

PMID33005125
PMCPMC7513428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.