ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2023
Participant experiences with a multipurpose vaginal ring for HIV and pregnancy prevention during a phase 1 clinical trial: learning from users to improve acceptability.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Introducing personalized patient care in overactive bladder management using the MedRing OAB system for intravaginal oxybutynin administration.Drug delivery · 2026Article
- Women's Perceptions of Novel 3-D Printed Vaginal Rings for Multipurpose Prevention.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- "When a Thorn Comes Into Your Body, You Must Remove It". A Socio-Ecological Analysis of the Acceptability of Intravaginal Artesunate as Cervical Precancer Treatment in a Phase 1 Clinical Trial.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: With high concurrent global rates of HIV incidence and unintended pregnancy, there is a need to provide options beyond condoms to enable users to simultaneously prevent HIV acquisition and pregnancy. Multiple vaginal rings are in development as "MPTs" (multipurpose prevention technologies) as they are shown to provide several co-occurring benefits such as discretion, convenience, reversibility and user control. Methods: In this Phase 1 trial of a 3-month MPT ring in the U.S., 25 participants (low-risk for HIV and pregnancy) were randomized to use the study ring for 90 days continuously or in 28-day cycles with 2-day removal periods in between. All participants completed in-depth interviews at the end of their study participation. Results: Overall, the ring was well tolerated. Participants resoundingly endorsed the concept of an extended-use, dual-purpose vaginal ring, but reported too many functional challenges and side effects to endorse this particular ring. Participants assigned to the continuous regimen reported more positive experiences with ring use than those in the cyclic group. A minority of participants who experienced minimal side effects and did not experience challenges with vaginal retention of the ring found it appealing. However, the majority of participants experienced challenges (ring slippage, expulsions, side effects, vaginal bleeding changes) with product use that outweighed the potential benefits and led them to report that - in the future - they would not be interested in using this specific version of the ring in its current form. A subset expressed interest in using the current MPT ring under certain conditions (e.g., if fewer expulsions, less bleeding, higher risk for HIV/pregnancy). Discussion: User feedback regarding participant experiences and challenges with the study ring was continuously shared with the product developer, underscoring the value of early-stage end-user feedback in product development.
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.