ArticleThe patient2026
Expanding Access to Oral Contraceptive Pills: Do Consumers Prefer Over-the-Counter Availability?
Article in The patient, 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
Abstract
backgroundExpanding access to oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) through over-the-counter (OTC) reclassification may reduce barriers to contraception, but Australian consumer preferences for OTC OCP access remain poorly understood.
methodsWe conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify women's preferences for OTC OCP access in Australia. The DCE incorporated five attributes: method of accessing OCPs, provider training, ability to discuss other health issues, consultation time, and out-of-pocket cost. A D-efficient design generated 12 choice sets. Data were collected through quota sampling from 878 women during November to December 2023, including 359 current OCP users and 519 non-OCP users. Preferences were analysed using mixed logit models.
resultsWomen using less effective contraceptive methods or no contraception favoured OTC access, whereas current OCP users did not show the same preference. Across groups, online general practitioner consultations and pharmacist consultations without a private setting were strongly disliked. Predicted uptake of, and switching to, OTC options was highest when OCPs received a high level of government funding, pharmacists had additional training in contraceptive care, women could discuss other health issues, and consultations were brief. Current OCP users were more likely to switch to OTC OCPs if they faced GP co-payments. Support for OTC access was greater among younger women, high-income women, and those with greater household decision-making autonomy.
conclusionsOTC access to OCPs is likely to be acceptable to many Australian women, particularly if pharmacists have received additional training in contraceptive care and consultations are affordable, private, and sufficiently comprehensive. Careful policy design will be needed to ensure acceptability, support informed contraceptive choices, and maximise the potential public health benefits of OCP reclassification.
Identifiers
42298278What 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.