Trial reportContraception2025
Estimating emergency contraception efficacy with levonorgestrel and copper intrauterine devices.
Trial report in Contraception, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to determine observed vs expected pregnancy risk among levonorgestrel 52 mg and copper T380A intrauterine device (IUD) emergency contraception (EC) users. STUDY
designThis is a secondary analysis of participants seeking EC randomly assigned to a levonorgestrel 52 mg or copper T380A IUD. Participants had at least one episode of unprotected intercourse (UPI) in the 5 days preceding enrollment and reported all episodes in the preceding 5 days. We report the proportion of pregnancies prevented of those expected at 1 month following IUD insertion using an established approach that assigns pregnancy risk by menstrual cycle day of intercourse. We calculated proportion of pregnancies prevented using both the day of most recent UPI and all reported UPIs within 5 days of presentation.
resultsOne pregnancy occurred among the 312 participants who received the levonorgestrel 52 mg IUD, with 137 (43.9%) reporting multiple episodes of UPI. No pregnancies occurred among the 318 participants who received the copper IUD, of whom 142 (44.6%) reported multiple episodes. In the levonorgestrel 52 mg IUD group, 14.8 pregnancies were expected using the most recent episode of UPI, and 22.0 pregnancies were expected using all episodes within 5 days of presentation. In the copper IUD group, we calculated 15.0 and 23.1 expected pregnancies, respectively. Levonorgestrel 52 mg IUDs prevented 93.2% to 95.7% of expected pregnancies, and copper IUDs prevented 100% of expected pregnancies.
conclusionsThe results of this analysis provide additional data quantifying the pregnancy risk reduction for both the levonorgestrel 52 mg IUD and copper IUD in a realistic population of EC users. IMPLICATIONS: The levonorgestrel 52 mg IUD for emergency contraception prevented 93% to 96% of expected pregnancies using an established pregnancy risk method, while copper IUD users experienced 100% pregnancy prevention.
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.