Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41764553›Full record

ArticleReproductive health2026

Provider perspectives on telehealth for contraceptive care: "the provider isn't going want to use it unless it's easy to use".

Alejandra Alvarez, Sophie M Morse, Yasaman Zia, Erica Somerson, Connie Folse, Kathryn Albergate Davis, Alison B Comfort, Ghazaleh Moayedi, Suzan Goodman, Cynthia C Harper

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive health, 2026. 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

10 authors.

Alejandra AlvarezBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Sophie M MorseBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA. Sophie.Morse@ucsf.edu.
Yasaman ZiaBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Erica SomersonBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Connie FolseBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Kathryn Albergate DavisConsultant, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Alison B ComfortBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Ghazaleh MoayediPegasus Health Justice Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Suzan GoodmanBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Cynthia C HarperBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Ave., UCSF, Box 0842, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.

Funding

AHRQ HHS T32HS022241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth services for contraception expanded significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic, but continued coverage for these services is uncertain. This study assessed providers' recent experiences delivering contraceptive care via telehealth to improve these services.

methodsWe conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with healthcare practitioners in the U.S. providing contraceptive services (N = 41) from August 2022 to August 2024 to investigate telehealth practices for contraceptive care. We used thematic analysis to code the data and identify barriers and facilitators of telehealth use by providers. We identified themes using a modified Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to assess factors that affected provision of telehealth contraceptive care.

resultsWe identified and mapped three main themes across CFIR domains: the incompatibility of telehealth with clinic systems and need for additional clinic support; varying preferences for in-person versus telehealth care; and the mixed impact of telehealth on patient privacy, agency, and rapport. Overall, participants enthusiastically discussed telehealth benefits for contraceptive care delivery. Some, however, limited their use of telehealth due to clinic requirements for Pap tests or onsite blood pressure readings for hormonal contraceptives. Many participants noted that judgment is needed to ensure privacy and caution in situations such as intimate partner violence and with certain patients such as adolescents.

conclusionResults reflected the enduring benefits of telehealth for contraceptive care. The reported barriers highlight changes needed to efficiently expand the scope of telehealth services. Our findings point to the importance of prioritizing and investing in telehealth services to reach patients who otherwise face challenges completing in-person care. Additionally, these findings may inform ongoing policy debates about continued coverage for this innovative method of service delivery.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelContraceptionFamily Planning ServicesHealth PersonnelTelemedicineAdultCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2United StatesContraceptive careImplementation scienceProvider perspectiveQualitative researchTelehealth

Identifiers

PMID41764553
PMCPMC13059397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.