ReviewPharmaceutical medicine2025
Contraception Requirements in Early Clinical Trials: Considerations Towards an Evidence-Based Approach.
Review in Pharmaceutical medicine, 2025. 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.
- Ethical complexities in contraceptive mandates for adolescent clinical trial participation: a qualitative analysis of U.S. adolescents' perspectives.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- PSA inhibitors for contraception: insights from prostate cancer.Trends in pharmacological sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enrollment of women of childbearing potential in clinical trials from early stages of drug development allows the gathering of relevant safety and pharmacokinetics data in the representative disease population. However, risk mitigation strategies are needed to ensure the safety of the developing embryo in case of unintended pregnancy in female study participants or in female partners of male study participants. These risk mitigation strategies often include contraception requirements, however we observed that such requirements vary widely across sponsors and trials. Some sponsors and contract research organizations adhere to the strictest precautions by default, assuming a worst-case scenario for each new compound's risk assessment. In this review, we provide an overview of the risks addressed by and introduced by contraception requirements in clinical trials. We critically discuss the 'worst-case' approach, and we present a holistic, risk-based approach that takes into account all relevant data, the pros and cons of using hormonal contraceptives, and subject burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39985724What 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.