ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2026
Experiences of Contraceptive Use and Contraceptive Counseling Among German Psychology Students: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey.
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: In recent years, hormonal contraceptive use has declined in Germany, yet little is known about the contraceptive needs and preferences of its population. This study addresses this gap by (1) identifying attitudes, subjective knowledge, and information needs of psychology students regarding contraceptive methods, (2) evaluating person-centeredness (PC) and shared decision-making (SDM) in contraceptive counseling, and (3) comparing users of hormonal and non-hormonal methods regarding attitudes, knowledge, and age. Patients and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study applying an online survey among psychology students in Germany, who were biologically capable of becoming pregnant. PC in counseling was assessed using the Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling Scale (PCCC), while SDM was measured using the CollaboRATE questionnaire and Control Preference Scale. Attitudes, knowledge, and information needs were evaluated through adapted or self-developed items. We translated and adapted the PCCC using a team translation protocol (TRAPD). Results: Of 126 participants, 82.6% used at least one contraceptive method, mainly condoms (43.8%) and the combined pill (19.8%). Most participants were satisfied with their currently used method and do not want to change their current method. Hormonal users were younger (M=22.84) than non-hormonal users (M=25.40). Attitudes toward hormonal contraception were generally negative. Participants reported good or basic knowledge of 9 out of 15 methods; non-hormonal users knew more methods than hormonal users. Gynecologists (36.7%) were the most frequent information source. About 35.7% had received contraceptive counseling in the previous year but reported low satisfaction with the information provided. Overall, PC and SDM were only partially implemented in contraceptive counseling. Conclusion: Findings highlight the need for more person-centered counseling to support informed decisions. The results can inform interventions aimed at improving contraceptive knowledge among users and enhancing PC and SDM practices among gynecologists.
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.