Intervention Review

Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception

  1. Paul O'Brien1,*,
  2. Caroline C Marfleet2

Editorial Group: Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group

Published Online: 16 JUL 2008

Assessed as up-to-date: 12 NOV 2004

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003282.pub2

Database Title

Additional Information

How to Cite

O'Brien P, Marfleet CC. Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD003282. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003282.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Westminster Primary Care Trust, Raymede Clinic, Westside Contraceptive Services, London, UK

  2. 2

    Colchester, Essex, UK

*Paul O'Brien, Raymede Clinic, Westside Contraceptive Services, Westminster Primary Care Trust, Exmoor St, London, W10 6DZ, UK. paulobrien@nhs.net.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 16 JUL 2008

SEARCH

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Summary (56K)Standard (281K)Full (281K)

  1. Current Version

    Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception

    Paul O'Brien and Caroline C Marfleet

    Article first published online: 16 JUL 2008 | DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003282.pub2

Previous versions of this article and their online publication dates

  1. Version 1

    Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception

    PA O'Brien and C Marfleet

    Article first published online: 18 OCT 2004 | DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003282

View Full Article (HTML) Summary (56K)Standard (281K)Full (281K)