ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2025
Interest in new methods of "male contraception" in survey of people with a prior vasectomy in the United States.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlternative contraceptive methods for sperm, often referred to as "male contraception" are in development. Given the lack of current contraceptive options for people who produce sperm, we sought to understand if people with vasectomies would have preferred an alternative contraceptive method, had one been available.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey with 195 participants. Participants were recruited via an email list of 658 people who had received vasectomies from Planned Parenthood North Central States (PPNCS) since 2013 and were willing to be contacted for research purposes.
results26.7% of participants reported that access to a different method of birth control for sperm that was highly effective, non-surgical, and fully reversible would have likely or very likely changed their decision to have a vasectomy (44.6% reported it was unlikely or very unlikely and 28.7% were neutral). Reasons for preferring alternative contraceptive methods included reversibility, the desire to avoid surgery, and the accessibility of alternative methods. Demographic findings include that 46.2% of people surveyed had no children at the time of their vasectomy and only 41% of participants were married at the time of their vasectomy. Previous literature has suggested most people undergoing vasectomies are married with children. Two main motivating factors in participants' decision to have a vasectomy were wanting to prevent future biological children and the preference of participants or their partners for vasectomy over other contraceptive methods.
conclusionsAlternative contraceptive methods for sperm would likely or very likely be preferred by a significant proportion of people who have undergone a vasectomy.
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.