SynthesisBMJ open2022
Systematic review of copper intrauterine contraception continuation in young nulliparous women based on intrauterine device type.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesNo copper intrauterine device (IUD) type is known to better suit young nulliparous women who tend to experience higher rates of IUD discontinuation compared with their older parous counterparts. A systematic review to determine which IUDs have higher continuation rates in young nulliparous women was undertaken.
designSystematic review and meta-analyses of available evidence based on IUD type. DATA SOURCES: AMED, BNI, CINAHL, DARE, EMBASE, EMCARE, HMIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, TRIP, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched from inception to 11 May 2022; as well as the Bandolier, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Department of Health, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines, WHO and Google Scholar websites. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies on IUDs currently available in the UK or comparable (same design and size) to those available in the UK, involving nulliparous women of any age including those aged under 30. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Independently extracted data were assessed as low risk of bias using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Random effects meta-analyses of proportions were performed where data, including subgroups, were amenable to quantitative synthesis. Heterogeneity was reported using tau
resultsNineteen studies involving 13 045 nulliparous women were included but the heterogeneity of participant ages, parity and IUD types made quantitative synthesis of outcome data in totality inappropriate. The highest continuation rate obtained was 91.02% (95% CI 88.01% to 93.64%) for the smaller TCu 380A at 12 months post insertion.
conclusionsEvidence for IUD use in young nulliparous women based on IUD type remains limited. Smaller sized IUD types appear better suited to this group of IUD users, however, more research is needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019120969.
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.