ArticleCureus2024
Emergency Contraception Knowledge, Attitudes, and Barriers Among Men: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, practices, and barriers to access of emergency contraceptive pills in married women and men: a multicenter clinic-based cross-sectional study from Karachi, Pakistan.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Knowledge and practices of emergency contraception use and associated factors among female undergraduate students in Northern Uganda: A cross-sectional study.Women's health (London, England)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
21 authors at 11 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Emergency contraception (EC) plays a pivotal role in the prevention of unintended pregnancies following unprotected sexual intercourse. Men's awareness regarding emergency contraception is pivotal for informed decision-making and for enhancing reproductive health in this context. This study investigated Syrian men's awareness and perspectives on emergency contraception to inform diverse reproductive health initiatives. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study in Syria, from June 2022 and April 2023. Our study included male participants aged 18 years or older who held Syrian nationality and volunteered to participate. The data collection involved administering a questionnaire comprising three sections (knowledge, attitude, and barrier assessment), encompassing a total of 30 questions. Data analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) (IBM SPSS Statistics, Armonk, NY). Results Most participants were aged 18-25 (65.7%) and single (75.4%) and held a university degree (79.3%). The knowledge of emergency contraception was low (36.1%), with the Internet and social media (77.5%) being the primary sources of information. While 89% held positive attitudes toward emergency contraception, only 37.3% supported nonprescription availability. Age, income, and desire for children were associated with knowledge, attitudes, and the use of emergency contraception. Men aged 26-35 exhibited the highest positive attitude (8.11±1.83). Those desiring no children showed higher attitude scores (7.42±2.04). Income was positively associated with knowledge (adjusted odds ratio {AOR}=1.75 and confidence interval {CI}=1.02-2.99) and emergency contraception use (AOR=2.87 and CI=1.27-6.48). Conclusion This study underscores the knowledge gap regarding emergency contraception in Syrian men. Despite positive attitudes, awareness remains limited, particularly among those of childbearing age. Targeted education and improved accessibility to emergency contraception can enhance its use among men, particularly in those with low socioeconomic status and younger age groups.
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.