Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41113541›Full record

ReviewOpen access journal of contraception2025

Understanding Problematic Bleeding When Using Contraception: Guidance for Clinicians.

Marta Barretta, Giovanni Grandi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Open access journal of 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Marta BarrettaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ramazzini Hospital, Carpi (MO), 41012, Italy.
Giovanni GrandiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences for Mother, Child and, Adult, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Di Modena, Modena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3567-3278

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a common side effect of hormonal contraceptive (HC) use and represents a significant cause of treatment discontinuation. Two main types of bleeding are recognized: withdrawal bleeding, which occurs during the hormone-free interval following a sudden drop in hormone levels, and breakthrough bleeding (BTB), defined as unscheduled bleeding during active hormone administration. Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) may induce BTB due to hormonal fluctuations or insufficient endometrial stabilization, while progestin-only contraception (POC) is commonly associated with abnormal bleeding due to endometrial changes induced by continuous progestin exposure. A structured and clinically oriented framework for the management of AUB in the context of HC is presented, highlighting the importance of appropriate counseling. Some strategies to improve adherence have been proposed, recognizing non-compliance as a major contributor to unscheduled bleeding. Contraceptive choice is addressed as an individualized process, involving adjustments to hormone type and dosage based on woman-specific needs. The aim is to provide clinicians with a clear and structured tool to address a highly prevalent yet often overlooked issue, still marked by significant uncertainty and inconsistency in the current literature.

Indexed as

abnormal uterine bleedingbreakthrough bleedingcombined oral contraceptiveshormonal contraceptionprogestin-only contraceptionwithdrawal bleeding

Identifiers

PMID41113541
PMCPMC12535263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.