ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Contraceptive Counseling: Construction and Validation of Instrument-"5C Contraceptive Counseling".
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Article
- Mixed methods in promoting contraceptive decision-making after voluntary-termination-of-pregnancy.Frontiers in global women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContraceptive illiteracy leads to non-adherence, discontinuation, and dissatisfaction with the method. Person-centered contraceptive counseling is based on quality care on a communicative basis that promotes shared decision-making, leading to a choice adapted to the woman's needs, lifestyle, and health condition. We intend to build and validate an instrument that serves as a guide for quality contraceptive counseling, facilitating decision-making about contraceptive methods.
methodsWe used the Delphi method in a total of two rounds. The content was validated through a panel of eighteen experts with experience in teaching, research in contraceptive counseling, and obstetric nursing. To assess the consensus and stability of the responses, two questionnaires were administered and the Content Validity Index and Content Validity Ratio were calculated.
resultsThe initial version of the guide, consisting of six indicators and thirty-five items, was submitted to the panel of experts to obtain consensus and stability from respondents (first round). The results showed a response rate of 66.0%; thirty-four indicators reached consensus and one did not reach consensus. Suggestions for modifying the indicator were received by the experts and incorporated in the next round. In the second round, the response rate increased to 78.0%. Two indicators were resubmitted, of which one was accepted. This resulted in the final version of the instrument, with six points and thirty-five items. DISCUSSION: The guide proved to be a valid tool for nurse-midwives to provide quality contraceptive advice to women, allowing them to make autonomous and informed choices regarding their sexual and reproductive health.
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.