ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2023
Willingness to use novel reversible methods of male birth control: a community-based survey of cisgender men in the United States.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 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.
- Why male contraception still stalls: translational, social, and ethical gaps.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of dimethandrolone undecanoate in non-human primates as a candidate for long-acting injectable male contraceptive.Andrology · 2025Article
- Male Hormonal Contraception-Current Stage of Knowledge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is high global demand for new methods of male birth control (MBC). However, contemporary evidence regarding men's method-specific attitudes and their determinants is sparse.
methodsNon-sterilized cisgender men ages 18-45 with recent history of female sex partners were surveyed at a large community event in the Midwestern US. We examined variation in participants' willingness to use MBC by method (gel, pill, injection, implant, and vas occlusion), potential side effects, and potential barriers. We estimated crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) for associations between participant characteristics and willingness to use ≥ 1 MBC method.
resultsOverall, 72% of participants (n = 187; mean age, 29) were very willing to use ≥ 1 MBC method although support for individual methods ranged widely from 62% (pill) to 24% (vas occlusion). In bivariate analysis of sociodemographic and health characteristics, few demonstrated associations with MBC willingness. In a multivariable model, willingness was independently related to age (30-39 vs. 18-29 years old, aPR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.04-1.48) and having ever been tested for HIV (aPR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.07-1.51). Willingness to tolerate side effects was < 10% for most items. The most commonly endorsed barriers to MBC use were high cost (77%) and side effects (66%).
conclusionsEnthusiasm for MBC was high but waned in the context of potential side effects and barriers. Additional research on MBC attitudes in socioeconomically and culturally diverse populations worldwide is sorely needed.
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.