Observational studyContraception2025
Selection of long acting reversible contraception methods by emergency contraception clients: A prospective observational study.
Observational study in Contraception, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04678817 (A Prospective Observational Study of Preference for and Efficacy of Oral Levonorgestrel Emergency Contraception With Same Day Etonogestrel Contraceptive Implant Compared to Established Pregnancy Rates With Oral Levonorgestrel Emergency Contraception Alone), which is not on this 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.
A Prospective Observational Study of Preference for and Efficacy of Oral Levonorgestrel Emergency Contraception With Same Day Etonogestrel Contraceptive Implant Compared to Established Pregnancy Rates With Oral Levonorgestrel Emergency Contraception Alone
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- One-year continuation of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant initiated with oral emergency contraception.Contraception · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo describe long acting reversible contraception (LARC) initiation in emergency contraception (EC) visits. STUDY
designEC clients age 18-35 years at four Utah family planning clinics between February 2021 and April 2023 chose between oral EC and three LARC options.
resultsOf 2106 EC clients approached, 306 (14.5%) requested LARC and 293 initiated a device: 160 (55%) an etonogestrel implant+ oral levonorgestrel (LNG), 72 (25%) a copper intrauterine device (IUD), and 61 (21%) a 52 mg levonorgestrel IUD (p < 0.001).
conclusionsIn this observational study, one in seven EC clients initiated a LARC method and more frequently selected the etonogestrel implant with oral levonorgestrel over an IUD. CLINICAL
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT04678817; registered 12/16/20.
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.