ArticleO&G open2026
Trends in Intrauterine Device Use Before and After National Eligibility Guideline Changes.
Article in O&G open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine changes in intrauterine device (IUD) use after national guideline updates (2010-2014) that expanded eligibility to include adolescents and nulliparous women in the United States.
methodsUsing cross-sectional data from the 2002-2023 waves of the National Survey of Family Growth, we analyzed contraceptive use among sexually active female individuals 15-44 years of age. An interrupted time series analysis compared changes in IUD use and other contraceptive methods before and after the guideline updates by parity, with parous women (two or more prior births) used as a partial comparison group to account for secular trends.
resultsUse of IUDs increased from nearly 0 in 2002 among nulliparous women to 17.3% (95% CI, 13.0-21.5%) by 2023. After the 2014 guideline update, there was an immediate level increase of 6.1 percentage points and an accelerated post-period slope of 1.32 percentage points/y (95% CI, 0.8-1.8). Among parous women, IUD use increased steadily through 2014 and then plateaued (post-2014 slope 0.05 percentage points/y, 95% CI, -0.48 to 0.58); the differential post-2014 slope was statistically significant (
conclusionNational guideline updates expanding IUD eligibility were associated with an immediate and sustained increase in IUD use among nulliparous women that was not present among parous women and did not vary by insurance coverage, although the absolute magnitude remained modest more than a decade after the change.
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.