ArticleWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
Changes in U.S. Healthcare Provider Practices Related to Emergency Contraception.
Article in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEmergency contraception (EC), including EC pills (ECPs) and the copper intrauterine device, can prevent pregnancy after sexual encounters in which contraception was not used or used incorrectly. The U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use (U.S. SPR), initially released in 2013, provides evidence-based clinical recommendations on the provision of EC. The objective of this analysis was to assess the percentage of health care providers reporting frequent provision of select EC practices around the time of and after the release of the U.S. SPR.
methodsWe conducted two cross-sectional mailed surveys using different nationwide samples of office-based physicians and public-sector providers in 2013 and 2014 (n = 2,060) and 2019 (n = 1,420). We compared the percentage of providers reporting frequent provision of select EC practices by time period, overall, and by provider type.
resultsIn 2019, few providers frequently provided an advance prescription for ECPs (16%), an advance supply of ECPs (7%), or the copper intrauterine device as EC (8%), although 41% frequently provided or prescribed regular contraception at the same time as providing ECPs. Providers in 2019 were more likely than providers in 2013 and 2014 to provide or prescribe contraception at the same time as providing ECPs (adjusted prevalence ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.59) and to provide a copper intrauterine device as EC (adjusted prevalence ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval 2.10-7.15); there were no other significant differences by time period.
conclusionsFew providers report frequent implementation of recommended EC practices. Understanding the barriers faced by providers and clinics in implementing these practices may improve access to EC.
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.