Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34223223›Full record

ArticleF&S reports2020

Use of contraception among reproductive-aged women in the United States, 2014 and 2016.

Megan L Kavanaugh, Emma Pliskin

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F&S reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07714590 (Effect of Periumbilical Vibration on Pain Perception During Intrauterine Device Insertion), which is not on this map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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.

NCT07714590 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Effect of Periumbilical Vibration on Pain Perception During Intrauterine Device Insertion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorDuke UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled114ConditionsIntrauterine Device PlacementArmsPeriumbilical Vibration during Intrauterine Device Placement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

2 authors.

Megan L KavanaughGuttmacher Institute, Research Division, New York, New York.
Emma PliskinGuttmacher Institute, Research Division, New York, New York.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine current levels, correlates of, and changes in contraceptive use among reproductive-age women in the United States between 2014 and 2016.

designWe conducted simple and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify associations between user characteristics and contraceptive use, with specific attention to methods requiring a visit to a health care provider.

settingNot applicable. PATIENTS: All self-identified female respondents to the surveys. Secondary analysis of two rounds of the National Survey of Family Growth, an in-home, nationally representative survey of people ages 15-44 years (2013-2015) and 15-49 years (2015-2017).

interventionsNone.

main outcome measuresCurrent use of a contraceptive method, including use of individual methods and grouped method use in 2016, and change in use from 2014.

resultsContraceptive use remained steady between 2014 and 2016 among sexually active females not seeking pregnancy (88%). Among users, use of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods increased from 14% to 18%, as use of short-acting reversible contraceptive (SARC) methods fell from 32% to 28%. Implant use among 15- to 19-year-olds rose from 6% to 16% and represents one of the largest increases observed. Access to sexual and reproductive health care was strongly associated with use of all LARC and SARC methods except for the implant (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 3.21 to 13.53).

conclusionsContraceptive users are shifting primarily among the most and moderately effective method groups, and not from contraceptive nonuse to use. Reductions in access to sexual and reproductive health care could have implications for individuals' ability to use their preferred contraceptive methods.

Indexed as

Contraceptiondemographyfamily planningUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34223223
PMCPMC8244260

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.