Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 666

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The venous thrombotic risk of oral contraceptives, effects of oestrogen dose and progestogen type: results of the MEGA case-control study

Open access
van Hylckama Vlieg, A, Helmerhorst, F M, Vandenbroucke, J P, Doggen, C J M, Rosendaal, F R·2009·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the thrombotic risk associated with oral contraceptive use with a focus on dose of oestrogen and type of progestogen of oral contraceptives available in the Netherlands. DESIGN: Population based case-control study. SETTING: Six participating anticoagulation clinics in the Netherlands (Amersfoort, Amsterdam, The Hague, Leiden, Rotterdam, and Utrecht). PARTICIPANTS: Premenopausal women <50 years old who were not pregnant, not within four weeks postpartum, and not using a hormone excreting intrauterine device or depot contraceptive. Analysis included 1524 patients and 1760 controls. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: First objectively diagnosed episodes of deep venous thrombosis of the leg or pulmonary embolism. Odds ratios calculated by cross-tabulation with a 95% confidence interval according to Woolf's method; adjusted odds ratios estimated by unconditional logistic regression, standard errors derived from the model. RESULTS: Currently available oral contraceptives increased the risk of venous thrombosis fivefold compared with non-use (odds ratio 5.0, 95% CI 4.2 to 5.8). The risk clearly differed by type of progestogen and dose of oestrogen. The use of oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel was associated with an almost fourfold increased risk of venous thrombosis (odds ratio 3.6, 2.9 to 4.6) relative to non-users, whereas the risk of venous thrombosis compared with non-use was increased 5.6-fold for gestodene (5.6, 3.7 to 8.4), 7.3-fold for desogestrel (7.3, 5.3 to 10.0), 6.8-fold for cyproterone acetate (6.8, 4.7 to 10.0), and 6.3-fold for drospirenone (6.3, 2.9 to 13.7). The risk of venous thrombosis was positively associated with oestrogen dose. We confirmed a high risk of venous thrombosis during the first months of oral contraceptive use irrespective of the type of oral contraceptives. CONCLUSIONS: Currently available oral contraceptives still have a major impact on thrombosis occurrence and many women do not use the safest brands with regard to risk of venous thrombosis.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.b2921

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 666

Metadata

Authors
van Hylckama Vlieg, A., Helmerhorst, F. M., Vandenbroucke, J. P., Doggen, C. J. M., & Rosendaal, F. R.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-08-13
Volume
339
Issue
aug13 2
Pages
b2921-b2921
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2137955943
Cited by
666
References
1
FWCI
40.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The venous thrombotic risk of oral contraceptives, effects of oestrogen dose and progestogen type: results of the MEGA case-control study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.b2921
The paper
van Hylckama Vlieg, A., Helmerhorst, F. M., Vandenbroucke, J. P., Doggen, C. J. M., & Rosendaal, F. R. (2009). The venous thrombotic risk of oral contraceptives, effects of oestrogen dose and progestogen type: results of the MEGA case-control study. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2921

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.