ArticleContraception2025
Changes in contraceptive method use, access, and experiences of care during a statewide contraceptive initiative.
Article in Contraception, 2025. 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.
- What Happened in Delaware Following a Statewide Contraceptive Initiative?The Milbank quarterly · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine changes in contraceptive use, access, and care experiences during a statewide contraceptive access initiative, Delaware Contraceptive Access Now. STUDY
designWe used responses from the Delaware/Maryland Survey of Women at the early wave (November, 2016-March, 2017) and late wave (February, 2021-October, 2021). Our cross-sectional sample included 6467 respondents at risk of unintended pregnancy. We used logistic regression to examine changes in contraceptive outcomes, controlling for age, race/ethnicity, income, education, marital status, and employment. Using interaction terms between state and survey wave, we compared population-level changes in outcomes in Delaware to changes in Maryland, which did not implement a similar contraceptive initiative.
resultsThe change in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use in Delaware compared to Maryland was estimated as a 2.8% point increase, but was not statistically significant (95% CI: -2.8, 8.3). Knowing where to get free LARC increased by 6.2% points (95% CI: 0.4, 12.1; p < 0.05) in Delaware compared to Maryland. Both Delaware and Maryland indicated substantial within-state decreases in reporting their doctor asked about plans for pregnancy (Delaware: -8.9% points; Maryland: -15.1% points), but the decrease in Delaware was significantly smaller: 5.6% points (95% CI: -0.9, 12.1; p < 0.1). Delaware also had a net decrease of 4.7% points (95% CI: -9.9, 0.5; p < 0.1), compared to Maryland, among those very or somewhat satisfied with their current method.
conclusionsWe observed a mixed picture of changes in contraceptive use, access, and care experiences during the program. Our findings will be useful to Delaware program administrators and others, including the federal government, as they adopt similar reforms. IMPLICATIONS: We found that the Delaware contraceptive access initiative substantially increased knowledge of free LARC access and led to a relative increase in respondents reporting they had been asked about their pregnancy plans, compared to Maryland, but was not associated with other outcomes.
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.