ArticleContraception2022
Contraceptive plans before preoperative assessment and at procedure in surgical abortion patients.
Article in Contraception, 2022. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo describe changes in contraceptive method plans pre-appointment, after counseling, and post-procedure in patients having an abortion. STUDY
designWe reviewed electronic medical records of University of California, Davis Health patients who had an operating room abortion from January 2015 to December 2016. We excluded persons with procedures for fetal anomaly or demise. We extracted patient demographics and contraceptive plans reported at each encounter (telephone intake, pre-operative appointment, and day of abortion). We evaluated individual contraceptive plans across the encounters, identified patient characteristics that contributed to plan change, and created a multivariable logistic regression model for predictors of contraception method plan change from telephone intake to post-procedure.
resultsThe 747 patients had a mean gestational age of 16 4/7 ± 5 0/7 weeks with 244 (32.7%) <15 weeks and 235 (31.5%) ≥20 weeks. At telephone intake, 273 (36.4%) wanted a long-acting method (139 [50.9%] intrauterine device [IUD]; 99 [36.3%] implant; 35 [12.3%] unspecified), 11 (3.9%) permanent contraception, and 248 (33.2%) a less effective or no method; 215 (28.8%) stated they were undecided. Most (357/433 [82.4%]) patients who planned a reversible method based on the telephone intake obtained that or a similar method. Of the 273 patients planning a long-acting method, 258 (94.5%) received an IUD (158 [40.9%]) or implant (100 [36.6%]). Of the 215 undecided patients, 88 (40.9%) received an IUD and 55 (25.6%) an implant. No demographic factors predicted a change in method plan.
conclusionsMost patients will receive the method they initially identified at the telephone intake after an abortion, especially those planning an IUD or implant. Undecided patients are commonly open to discussing options.
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.