ArticleHeliyon2024
Motivators for emergency contraception: Previous pregnancy and condom rupture.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sociodemographic and Medical Characteristics of Women Applied for Emergency Contraception-A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Little is known about the motivations to apply for emergency contraception (EC). Our first aim was to explore the motivating circumstances to use EC as fast as possible. Our second aim was to explore the contraceptive method of the population seeking EC. Study design: This present retrospective observational study between July 2021 and September 2021 is embedded in the MEEC (Motivation and Epidemiology of Emergency Contraceptive Pill) based on the study cohort of a Hungarian data bank containing follow-up data of 455 women applied for EC telemedicine consultation. Variables assessed were: age, gynecological history (pregnancies, abortions, miscarriages), data of the intercourse (elapsed time, contraceptive method), and data of the menstrual cycle, and relationship status. Results: Of all patients, 59.3 % reported condom rupture, 29.5 % no protection, and 11.2 % other. Patients using condom applied for EC significantly sooner than those using no protection and using other protective methods. A significantly shorter elapsed time was observed in patients with a history of a previous pregnancy. No significant relationship was seen between the way of protection, previous pregnancies, and surprisingly the time of ovulation despite the obvious intention of avoiding pregnancy. Conclusions: This is the first study to examine the potential role of epidemiologic factors as motivators for EC on the basis of a large patient cohort. Our study demonstrates the significant role of condom rupture/use and the history of previous pregnancies to be the strongest motivators for EC.
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.