Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40313009›Full record

ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026

Practice Nurse Provision of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Knowledge and Practices.

Sharon James, Satish Melwani, Stella May Gwini, Kirsten I Black, Angela Taft, Deborah Bateson, Wendy V Norman, Danielle Mazza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sharon JamesDepartment of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, SPHERE, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2211-3447
Satish MelwaniDepartment of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, SPHERE, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8256-3330
Stella May GwiniMonash Centre for Occupational & Environmental Health, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0295-4575
Kirsten I BlackSpecialty of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0030-2431
Angela TaftSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Judith Lumley Centre, LaTrobe University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6350-843X
Deborah BatesonFaculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1035-7110
Wendy V NormanDepartment of Family Practice, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4340-7882
Danielle MazzaDepartment of General Practice, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, SPHERE, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6158-7376

Funding

Canada Research Chairs 2024-2032Canada Research Chairs CRC-2023-00135CIHR 2014-2024-CPP-329455National Health and Medical Research Council 1191793
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo describe practice nurse long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) knowledge and practices.

designCross-sectional survey.

methodsBetween July and December 2021, we conducted an online survey using convenience sampling to recruit Australian nurses who work in primary care, known as practice nurses. We collected data about demographics and knowledge and practices relating to LARC. Analysis used descriptive statistics and Poisson regression.

resultsFrom 489 eligible responses, most respondents were women and the majority worked in metropolitan practices. Most (90.4%) believed that their advice could influence women's contraceptive choices. Few inserted/removed intrauterine devices (IUDs) (11.2%) or implants (15.9%). Of those that did insert LARC, most did so one to five times in the last month (IUDs 72.2%; implants 73.6%). General practice as a primary place of work was negatively associated with implant provision. Respondents with more general practice experience (≥ 15 years) and/or higher qualifications were more likely to respond correctly to knowledge questions and provide IUDs or implants. Most (62.8%) correctly identified IUD suitability for nulliparous women.

conclusionsPractice nurses have knowledge gaps and limited practice opportunities for LARC provision. IMPLICATIONS: Practice nurses need supportive funding policies and ongoing education and skills development to enhance patient access to LARC and their choice of provider. REPORTING

methodCHERRIES guideline. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Partner organisations assisted with the study's recruitment.

trial registrationACTRN12622000655741.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeLong-Acting Reversible ContraceptionPractice Patterns, Nurses'AdultAustraliaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultcontraceptionlong‐acting reversible contraceptionnursingprimary carewomen's health

Identifiers

PMID40313009
PMCPMC12810668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.