ReviewMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Cardiovascular Safety of Hormonal Contraception: Method-Specific Risks and Clinical Implications.
Review in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hormonal contraception is used by hundreds of millions of women worldwide and remains one of the most effective reversible methods of pregnancy prevention. Cardiovascular (CV) safety concerns, particularly venous thromboembolism (VTE), ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and blood pressure elevation, are important considerations when choosing forms of contraception. Estrogen-containing combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) increase the relative risk of VTE; however, among healthy young nonsmokers, absolute event rates remain low. Risk is strongly modified by estrogen dose, progestin type, route of administration, and individual factors such as age, smoking, migraine with aura, hypertension, obesity, inherited thrombophilia, the postpartum period, and concomitant prothrombotic medications. Progestin-only contraceptives and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUSs) generally show a more favorable thrombotic profile and are preferred options for women with contraindications for estrogen. This review summarizes current evidence on the method-specific CV risks of hormonal contraception, highlights the mechanisms underlying these effects, and provides practical guidance for clinical decision-making.
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.