ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Medication Adherence and Contraceptive Counseling.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of drospirenone as a progestin-only pill in Japanese women: A phase III study.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2025Trial
- Intravaginal progesterone as a fertility-sparing treatment for symptomatic adenomyosis: preliminary results from a monocentric study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Combined oral contraceptives (COC) are a very popular form of birth control. Incorrect use and lack of adherence to treatment reduce the effectiveness of this method. Having a standard tool to identify poor-adherence profiles quickly and objectively can be helpful for midwives and potentially for COC users. The MMAS-4 adherence scale has been used in various medical fields, but there is little evidence of its potential in contraceptive consultation. This paper presents a piece of multicenter observational research based on a sample of 327 women who had attended contraceptive counselling in Spain and were COC users or had informed the midwife that they want to start to use this method. Two interviews were conducted: at the time of consultation and after one year. In our research, the MMAS-4 identified high-risk behaviors: during the 1-year follow-up period, COC users classified as poorly adherent had a significantly higher risk of missed contraceptive pills, more incidents and problems related to the method of contraception, as well as a lower degree of satisfaction with the contraceptive method. One case of unplanned pregnancy and two cases of emergency contraception were identified, all of them corresponding to poorly adherent women. The use of MMAS-4 in consultation can improve midwives' contraceptive counselling.
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.