Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36577495›Full record

ArticleApplied clinical informatics2023

Evaluation of an Online Decision Aid for Selection of Contraceptive Methods.

Molly Redman, Jennifer Brian, Dongwen Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied clinical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Online decision aids for contraceptive choices in women with chronic conditions: A systematic review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Sensitivity Analyses of a Scoring System for a Contraception Decision Aid.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2024
    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

3 authors.

Molly RedmanCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States.
Jennifer BrianBarrett, The Honors College, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States.
Dongwen WangCollege of Health Solutions, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesKnowledge gaps in contraceptives led to their low adoption rates and misuse in young women. The existing online contraception decision aids missed certain decision factors deemed important to college-aged women and did not consistently provide clear and accurate recommendations. To address the needs of young women and the limitations in current tools, we developed a prototype contraception decision aid, My Contraceptive Choice (MCC). This article reports an evaluation study of the MCC tool.

methodsWe conducted a mixed methods study: (1) to assess MCC's usefulness and usability through an online survey and a follow-up focus group, and (2) to provide a quantitative examination on the recommendations generated by MCC to match with individual user's needs and preferences through simulated test cases.

resultsThe survey of 150 college-aged women showed very positive responses (reflecting personal preferences, 75%; helping people learn more about birth control methods, 88%; easy to navigate, 91%). The follow-up focus group of 10 survey participants reconfirmed most findings from the survey and provided detailed feedback on certain system functions, such as the inclusion of an important decision factor of weight gain and the efficient hybrid design to integrate the customized recommendations with the side-by-side comparison of all contraceptive methods. Simulated test cases showed that the MCC tool achieved an accuracy of 72% in addressing user preferences and an accuracy of 72% in satisfying user needs, which were significantly better than the existing Planned Parenthood tool.

conclusionThe initial evaluations suggest that the MCC tool has achieved good levels of usefulness, usability, and appropriate recommendations to address user needs and preferences. Future research is required to assess the performance of the MCC tool in naturalistic settings and to examine the generalizability of the findings to other user populations.

Indexed as

ContraceptionDecision Support TechniquesFemaleFocus GroupsHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID36577495
PMCPMC9946780

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.