Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness

  1. Laureen M Lopez1,*,
  2. Markus Steiner2,
  3. David A Grimes3,
  4. Deborah Hilgenberg4,
  5. Kenneth F Schulz5

Editorial Group: Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group

Published Online: 30 APR 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 13 FEB 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006964.pub3


How to Cite

Lopez LM, Steiner M, Grimes DA, Hilgenberg D, Schulz KF. Strategies for communicating contraceptive effectiveness. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD006964. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006964.pub3.

Author Information

  1. 1

    FHI 360, Clinical Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

  2. 2

    FHI, Clinical Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

  3. 3

    University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

  4. 4

    FHI 360, Scientific Affairs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

  5. 5

    FHI 360 and UNC School of Medicine, Quantitative Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

*Laureen M Lopez, Clinical Sciences, FHI 360, P.O. Box 13950, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27709, USA. llopez@fhi360.org.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 30 APR 2013

SEARCH

[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Expanded counseling and education program versus standard family planning information, Outcome 1 Woman's contraceptive use: sterilized by 6 weeks postpartum.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Expanded counseling and education program versus standard family planning information, Outcome 2 Woman's contraceptive use: modern contraceptive method at 6 weeks postpartum.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Expanded counseling and education program versus standard family planning information, Outcome 3 Woman's contraceptive use: no contraceptive method at 6 weeks postpartum.
[Analysis 1.4]
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Expanded counseling and education program versus standard family planning information, Outcome 4 Woman's attitudes at 6 weeks postpartum.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Couples intervention to reduce risk for unintended pregnancy versus standard care, Outcome 1 Perceived pregnancy risk (at 6 months).
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Couples intervention to reduce risk for unintended pregnancy versus standard care, Outcome 2 Perceived importance of not becoming pregnant (at 6 months).
[Analysis 2.3]
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Couples intervention to reduce risk for unintended pregnancy versus standard care, Outcome 3 Positive expectations for partner's support for contraception (at 6 months).
[Analysis 2.4]
Analysis 2.4. Comparison 2 Couples intervention to reduce risk for unintended pregnancy versus standard care, Outcome 4 Participation in contraceptive decision making (at 6 months).
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 Couples intervention for long-term contraceptive use (videos), Outcome 1 Contraceptive chosen: methods video versus control video.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 Couples intervention for long-term contraceptive use (videos), Outcome 2 Contraceptive chosen: motivational video versus methods video.
[Analysis 3.3]
Analysis 3.3. Comparison 3 Couples intervention for long-term contraceptive use (videos), Outcome 3 Contraceptive chosen: motivational+methods videos versus methods video.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 Structured counseling versus usual care, Outcome 1 Contraceptive chosen.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 Structured counseling versus usual care, Outcome 2 Continuation at 3 months.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 Personalized audiovisual education materials versus nonpersonalized materials, Outcome 1 Knowledge gain.
[Analysis 5.2]
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 Personalized audiovisual education materials versus nonpersonalized materials, Outcome 2 Satisfaction excellent.
[Analysis 6.1]
Analysis 6.1. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 1 Change in comprehension: categories versus numbers.
[Analysis 6.2]
Analysis 6.2. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 2 Change in comprehension: categories versus categories+numbers.
[Analysis 6.3]
Analysis 6.3. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 3 Perception that table provided enough information to choose: categories versus numbers.
[Analysis 6.4]
Analysis 6.4. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 4 Perception that table was difficult to understand: categories versus numbers.
[Analysis 6.5]
Analysis 6.5. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 5 Perception that table provided enough information to choose: categories versus categories+numbers.
[Analysis 6.6]
Analysis 6.6. Comparison 6 Communicating pregnancy risk (three tables), Outcome 6 Perception that table was difficult to understand: categories versus categories+numbers.
[Analysis 7.1]
Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Communicating pregnancy risk (three charts), Outcome 1 Change in comprehension: categories versus stratified.
[Analysis 7.2]
Analysis 7.2. Comparison 7 Communicating pregnancy risk (three charts), Outcome 2 Change in comprehension: categories versus continuum.
[Analysis 7.3]
Analysis 7.3. Comparison 7 Communicating pregnancy risk (three charts), Outcome 3 Perceptions of chart: categories versus stratified.
[Analysis 7.4]
Analysis 7.4. Comparison 7 Communicating pregnancy risk (three charts), Outcome 4 Perceptions of chart: categories versus continuum.