ArticleReproductive health2026
Contraceptive and sexual health services during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery: a mixed-methods study in England.
Article in Reproductive health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Responding to the COVID-19 pandemic through global partnerships: the case of the HRP Alliance for research capacity strengthening.Reproductive health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSexual and reproductive health (SRH) is essential for public health. COVID-19 led to major disruptions in the provision of essential services including SRH services. Within the context of a multi-country project, this study aimed to explore individual and service-level impacts on contraceptive and sexual health services during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery phase in England.
methodsA longitudinal, mixed-methods design was implemented, collecting data in two phases, approximately 9 months apart (November 2021 and July 2022). The study comprised in-depth interviews with staff (n = 4) and clients (n = 20) of a sexual health and contraceptive clinical service in the Southeast of England. Over the same timeframe, a quantitative service availability and readiness assessment (SARA) was completed, based on World Health Organization validated tools.
resultsSexual health and contraceptive services continued to operate throughout the pandemic, however measures taken to prevent COVID-19 transmission and staff capacity issues (due to staff redeployment, staff sickness) impacted on patient choice (e.g. how the service could be accessed, methods of contraception available) and patient experience (e.g. delays in accessing healthcare). Despite disruptions, staff described how in-person provision remained available almost continuously for urgent/vulnerable cases. SARA data confirmed service availability, and qualitative data indicate how this was managed. For example, postal home self-sampling for STIs/HIV was expanded and contraceptive counselling by telephone was introduced to reduce clinic visits, and was retained due to popularity. At Time 2, services were running close to normal.
conclusionsCOVID-19 disrupted sexual health and contraceptive services in England. Compared to pre-pandemic, more elements of these services were delivered remotely. Readiness to adapt was aided by the pre-pandemic direction-of-travel towards greater use of digital and telemedicine services. Innovations require robust evaluation to ensure optimisation for public health benefit both in the pandemic and post-pandemic context.
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.