ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2026
Cross-sectional study on the knowledge, attitude, and experience of emergency contraception among female students of the University of Sierra Leone.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 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.
- Emergency contraception among female university students in Sierra Leone: An exploratory study of use, knowledge, attitudes, and associated factors.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmergency contraception (EC) is a safe and effective method of preventing pregnancy after unprotected sexual intercourse, but its use requires good knowledge and a positive attitude. This study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and experience of EC among female students of childbearing age at the University of Sierra Leone.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at the three colleges of the University of Sierra Leone: Fourah Bay College, College of Medicine and Allied Health Sciences, and the Institute of Public Administration Management. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect data from the 320 female undergraduate students. Knowledge about EC was measured and scored as "good knowledge" and "poor knowledge". An independent sample t-test was used to determine the significant difference between the socio-demographic characteristics and knowledge score, with statistical significance shown from a p-value < 0.05. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences 21.
resultsThe mean age of the participants was 24.1 years. More than half of the participants (58.9%) had good knowledge of EC, with significant differences in knowledge scores observed by age and academic discipline. Older students (25-64 years) scored higher (M = 63.26, SD = 21.92) than younger students (18-24 years) (M = 55.93, SD = 21.56; p = 0.003). Health science students also demonstrated greater knowledge (M = 70.25, SD = 25.35) compared to non‑health science students (M = 55.42, SD = 19.95; p < 0.001). Most of the respondents (85.6%) were sexually active, and more than half of them had previously used EC, in the form of I-pills (99.5%). Only 7.8% reported experiencing an unintended pregnancy. While 65.9% believed EC to be safe, misconceptions persisted: 54.4% viewed EC as a form of abortion, 56.9% considered it sinful, and 63.2% believed it promotes promiscuity.
conclusionMore than half of the students demonstrated good knowledge of emergency contraception, with higher scores among older and health science participants. Misconceptions about safety and morality remain widespread. Expanding tailored education, peer‑led initiatives, and integrating sexual health into non‑health science curricula, alongside accessible and respectful services and community engagement, is essential to dispel myths, reduce stigma, and promote informed use among young women.
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.