Trial reportContraception2021
Debunking myths about contraceptive safety among women in Kingston, Jamaica: Pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Correlates of reproductive coercion among women of reproductive age in Kingston, Jamaica and Hanoi, Vietnam.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Review
- Digital knowledge translation tools for sexual and reproductive health information to adolescents: an evidence gap-map.Therapeutic advances in reproductive healthReview
- Contraceptive use to delay first birth and its associated factors among married young women in rural parts of central Oromia, Ethiopia: A community-based cross-sectional 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectives(1) To create a short motion graphic video to debias women, using evidence from cognitive psychology, of 2 common myths about safety of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants in Jamaica; and (2) to conduct a pilot study to evaluate video effectiveness. STUDY
designWe conducted a series of 3 focus group discussions among target users to inform the development process of the script, story, character, and look of the intervention video. We randomized young, female nonusers of long-acting contraception at risk of pregnancy at a public clinic in Kingston in 2018-2019 to watch either the intervention (n = 113) or control video (n = 112). We used logistical regression to evaluate perceptions of method safety, naturalness, and uptake after 3 months of follow up.
resultsAlmost all (n = 220; 97.8%) participants completed the 3-month interview. More women in the intervention arm perceived IUDs to be safe (59.1%) compared to the control arm (43.6%; p = 0.02). Perceived implant safety increased from enrollment to follow up in the intervention and control arms (10.9 and 2.7 percentage-point increases, respectively); however, the difference between arms at follow up was not statistically significant (p = 0.57). This appeared to be due to arm imbalances at enrollment. Study arms did not differ at follow up in perceived IUD naturalness (p = 0.36) or implant naturalness (p = 0.68).
conclusionsFindings from a pilot study of a video intervention suggest that using debiasing strategies from cognitive psychology has the potential to address misconceptions about contraceptive safety. A larger trial with adequate power is warranted. IMPLICATIONS: Evidence from a pilot randomized controlled trial suggested that use of debiasing strategies from cognitive psychology could be effective in correcting women's misconceptions about contraception safety and thus show promise for the design of future contraceptive promotion videos to increase uptake.
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.