Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34400154›Full record

ArticleContraception2021

Self-removal of long-acting reversible contraception: A content analysis of YouTube videos.

Kathleen Broussard, Andréa Becker

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. [Contraception on YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok : A content and quality analysis].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. "Women's health (London, England)
    Article
  13. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kathleen BroussardPopulation Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States. Electronic address: rkbroussard@prc.utexas.edu.
Andréa BeckerThe Graduate Center, CUNY, New York, NY, United States.
The Graduate Center, CUNY · USThe University of Texas at Austin · US

Funding

Population Research CenterR24HD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI HAYWARD, MARK D. · 2002 to 2016
$8.4M
Training Program in Population StudiesT32HD007081 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI Aprile Dawn Benner, Abigail Mae Weitzman · 1985 to 2026
$6.8M
Program Development and Pilot CoreP30AG066614 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI KAREN L FINGERMAN · 2020 to 2026
$5.2M
Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI MARK D. HAYWARD · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
NIA NIH HHS P30 AG066614NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD042849NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007081
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore publicly available information about the self-removal of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) on a popular video-sharing website. STUDY

designWe conducted a comprehensive keyword search of YouTube videos related to self-removal of LARC-namely intrauterine devices and implants. We analyzed video content to explore demographic characteristics, method and duration of LARC use, and motivations and experiences of self-removal.

resultsOur keyword search identified 58 videos that met the criteria for inclusion, including 48 videos that featured individuals who removed an intrauterine device and 10 who removed an implant. Collectively, videos had over 4 million views. We identified most video creators as white (53%), 31% as Black, and 14% as Latinx. Users were motivated to remove their own device by both preferences and barriers to formal care. Most individuals in our sample (n = 56/58) successfully removed their device and described their experience in positive terms related to the ease of removal. Reasons for LARC discontinuation included negative side effects, fear of potential side effects, and desire for pregnancy.

conclusionThis study builds upon prior research by describing publicly available information about LARC self-removal. The over representation of Black women in our sample may reflect a higher prevalence of LARC self-removal among this population. Positive experiences of self-removal and high levels of viewer engagement with online videos suggest a need for provider counseling on LARC removal at the time of insertion. IMPLICATIONS: Prior to LARC insertion, patients should be made aware of any financial requirements for discontinuation. Provider counseling for self-removal at the time of insertion will likely minimize health risks and affirm patient reproductive autonomy.

Indexed as

Contraceptive Agents, FemaleIntrauterine DevicesLong-Acting Reversible ContraceptionSocial MediaContraceptionCounselingFemaleHumansPregnancyContraceptive Agents, FemaleContraceptive attitudesDiscontinuationImplantIUDOnlineSelf-removal

Identifiers

PMID34400154
PMCPMC8592268
OpenAlexW3195644496

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.