ArticleContraception2025
Disparities in perceptions of long-acting reversible contraceptives among patients in Delaware Title X clinics.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesWe examined whether there were racial/ethnic and insurance status differences in patients reporting a sense of relief with the idea of using long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) and whether these differences were attenuated by provider trust and fertility concerns among Title X patients. STUDY
designWe analyzed two waves of data from a repeated cross-sectional patient survey designed to capture a representative sample of Title X patient health encounters in Delaware (N = 797), fielded in the context of a larger study designed to evaluate a statewide intervention to improve patient access to highly effective contraceptive methods.
resultsWe found that a majority of patients reported a sense of relief associated with the idea of using LARCs and differences by race/ethnicity and insurance status. Insurance coverage differences were attenuated by adjusting for reversibility concerns, fertility concerns, and patient-provider trust, but racial/ethnic disparities remained. Fifty-nine percent (95% CI, 55%-63%) of Black respondents reported a sense of relief at the idea of having an LARC, compared with 67% (95% CI, 63%-71%) and 65% (95% CI, 62%-67%) of White and Hispanic/Latinx patients, respectively. Patients who did not trust their provider to remove an IUD on request had a predicted probability of 50% (95% CI, 43%-57%) of viewing LARC with a sense of relief compared with 70% (95% CI, 64%-76%) of patients who reported trust in their provider to do so.
conclusionsThis study contributes to the growing body of research on reproductive autonomy by shedding further light on how decisions regarding contraceptive usage are made in the context of perceived agency constraints in health care settings. IMPLICATIONS: This study underscores the importance of efforts to improve equitable access to long-acting reversible contraceptives by promoting patient-provider trust, addressing patient concerns regarding the short- and long-term effects of LARCs, and ensuring patients have continued access to healthcare treatment.
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.