Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40568691›Full record

ReviewAustralian prescriber2025

Update on long- and short-acting contraceptive methods.

Emma Mason, Kirsten Black

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Australian prescriber, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Emma MasonThe University of Sydney.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2371-4642
Kirsten BlackThe University of Sydney.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0030-2431

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Long-acting reversible contraceptive methods, including the contraceptive implant and intrauterine devices, are highly effective and cost-effective options for women who have no specific contraindications. Long-acting reversible contraceptives are more effective at reducing unintended pregnancy than short-acting contraceptives. Short-acting contraceptive methods consist of combined hormonal contraception (e.g. the combined oral contraceptive pill, vaginal ring), progestogen-only pills, and the progestogen-containing contraceptive injection. Choice of contraception is based on factors such as medical eligibility (i.e. precautions, contraindications), patient preference and reproductive life stage. Counselling patients on the benefits and risks of all contraceptive methods is important for informed decision-making. Regular contraceptive review can allow for patient education and monitoring of adverse effects.

Indexed as

contraceptionintrauterine deviceslong-acting reversible contraceptionoral contraceptive pillprogestogen-only pill

Identifiers

PMID40568691
PMCPMC12187473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.