ArticleRevista de saude publica2025
Use of modern contraceptive methods and pregnancy planning: a cohort study.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the association between unplanned pregnancy and use of modern contraceptive methods at 3-, 12-, and 24-months postpartum using an intersectional approach for examining inequalities, in the 2015 Pelotas birth cohort, Brazil. We evaluated the use of modern contraceptives after delivery, comparing women who had planned and unplanned pregnancies in 2015. The number of women included in this study was: 4,021, 3,687, and 3,558, at 3-, 12-, and 24-month postpartum follow-ups, respectively. Analyses were restricted to women who needed contraception by the time of each postpartum follow-up interview. Sociodemographic indicators were also investigated. Descriptive (absolute and relative frequencies), bivariate, and multivariate statistical analyses were conducted. These analyses included the main exposure and the sociodemographic variables. In the three follow-up interviews, double stratification was used to investigate for intersectionalities between pregnancy planning and family income, and pregnancy planning and living with partner. Women who had unplanned pregnancies presented the lowest use of modern contraceptives. A negative association between unplanned pregnancy and use of modern contraception was found at 3- (PR = 0.97, 95%CI: 0.95-0.99) and 24-months postpartum (PR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.94-0.98). In general, women who did not live with a partner, with lower schooling level, and who were 35 or older presented lower use of modern contraception. Women who had unplanned pregnancies with lower family income and who did not live with a partner presented a lower prevalence of modern contraceptive use. Despite the possible benefits of the use of modern contraception in the postpartum period, women who had unplanned pregnancies presented the lowest prevalence. No consistent pattern was identified for this association over time. It is necessary to consider important sociodemographic factors such as living with partner as well as possible pathways to reduce inequalities.
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.