The DOI matches its Crossref record; 535 of the 536 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 524 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2016
Open accessAbstract
The 2016 U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (U.S. MEC) comprises recommendations for the use of specific contraceptive methods by women and men who have certain characteristics or medical conditions. These recommendations for health care providers were updated by CDC after review of the scientific evidence and consultation with national experts who met in Atlanta, Georgia, during August 26-28, 2015. The information in this report updates the 2010 U.S. MEC (CDC. U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2010. MMWR 2010:59 [No. RR-4]). Notable updates include the addition of recommendations for women with cystic fibrosis, women with multiple sclerosis, and women receiving certain psychotropic drugs or St. John's wort; revisions to the recommendations for emergency contraception, including the addition of ulipristal acetate; and revisions to the recommendations for postpartum women; women who are breastfeeding; women with known dyslipidemias, migraine headaches, superficial venous disease, gestational trophoblastic disease, sexually transmitted diseases, and human immunodeficiency virus; and women who are receiving antiretroviral therapy. The recommendations in this report are intended to assist health care providers when they counsel women, men, and couples about contraceptive method choice. Although these recommendations are meant to serve as a source of clinical guidance, health care providers should always consider the individual clinical circumstances of each person seeking family planning services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice for individual patients. Persons should seek advice from their health care providers when considering family planning options.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from a shortened version of the paper’s full text (it is longer than we read).
TL;DR
This 2016 CDC report updates the U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use (U.S. MEC), assigning category 1–4 classifications for the safety of contraceptive methods in people with specific characteristics and medical conditions. It adds recommendations for cystic fibrosis, multiple sclerosis, certain psychotropic drugs and St. John's wort, and ulipristal acetate for emergency contraception, and revises recommendations for postpartum/breastfeeding women, HIV, and several other conditions.
Key findings
- Approximately 45% of pregnancies in the United States are unintended; the goal of the recommendations is to remove unnecessary medical barriers to contraception and thereby decrease unintended pregnancies.
- Eligibility is classified into four categories: 1 = no restriction; 2 = advantages generally outweigh theoretical or proven risks; 3 = risks usually outweigh advantages; 4 = unacceptable health risk. Example given: COCs are category 2 for smokers aged <35 years, category 3 for women aged ≥35 years smoking <15 cigarettes/day, and category 4 for those smoking ≥15 cigarettes/day.
- Notable updates from U.S. MEC 2010 include new recommendations for women with cystic fibrosis, multiple sclerosis, and women receiving certain psychotropic drugs or St. John's wort; revisions for emergency contraception (adding ulipristal acetate); and revisions for postpartum and breastfeeding women and women with dyslipidemias, migraine, superficial venous disease, gestational trophoblastic disease, STDs, HIV, and those receiving antiretroviral therapy.
- On progestin-only injectables and HIV acquisition, CDC "reviewed all available evidence and agreed that the data were not sufficiently conclusive to change current guidance," but advises women using these methods to also always use condoms and take other HIV preventive measures.
Methods
- CDC monitored new literature via the WHO/CDC continuous identification of research evidence (CIRE) system, with automated weekly PubMed searches; in 2014 CDC reviewed all existing 2010 recommendations for evidence that could change a recommendation.
- An expert meeting was held August 27–28, 2014, in Atlanta with 11 family planning experts and partner representatives to set scope and process; a second meeting August 26–28, 2015, involved 44 participants (29 participating throughout, 15 topic-specific experts).
- Systematic reviews were conducted for each topic following PRISMA guidelines, with strength and quality of evidence assigned using the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force system; when direct evidence was limited, indirect evidence and theoretical concerns were considered. Reviews were peer reviewed by two or three experts, and three external reviewers commented on accuracy, feasibility, and clarity.
Limitations
- Stated: recommendations for which no evidence is cited are based on expert opinion from the WHO or U.S. expert meetings and might draw on sources other than systematic reviews; indirect evidence and theoretical concerns were used when direct evidence was limited or unavailable.
- Stated: limited information exists on the safety of the combined hormonal patch and vaginal ring in women with specific medical conditions, so their categories are considered "a preliminary best judgement" pending further studies, and COC evidence is applied to them except where noted.
- Stated: evidence on breastfeeding and progestin-only methods is generally of poor quality, lacks standard definitions of breastfeeding or outcome measures, and has not included premature or ill infants; evidence on the relationship between hormonal contraception and HIV acquisition is described as inconclusive.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
207 Not checked yet · 54 No basis given · 46 Own interpretation · 4 Own method
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“sole use of barrier methods for contraception and behavior-based methods of contraception might not be the most appropriate choice because of their relatively higher typical-use rates of failure (Figure).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Health Risk
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Higher rates of expulsion during the postpartum period should be considered as they relate to effectiveness”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No studies directly examined the risk for stroke among women with migraine using LNG-IUDs (97).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [97]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“evidence is inconsistent regarding an association between DMPA and increased risk for HIV acquisition”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, evidence does not support an association between POC use and progression of HIV.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No studies directly examined the risk for stroke among women with migraine using POCs (103).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [103]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No direct evidence exists on use of POCs among women with DVT/PE receiving anticoagulant therapy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No direct evidence exists on use of POCs among women with acute DVT/PE.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Overall, evidence does not support an association between oral contraceptives and risk for HIV acquisition”
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · plain
“Overall, evidence does not support an association between oral contraceptives and risk for HIV acquisition (232).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108]
- Not checked yetcites [232]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No data have assessed effectiveness of contraceptive implants during later years of use when progestin concentrations are lower and risk for failure from drug interactions might be greater.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Use of DMPA is a category 1 because its effectiveness is not decreased by use of certain anticonvulsants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Limited clinical and pharmacokinetic data do not demonstrate concern for SSRIs decreasing the effectiveness of oral contraceptives.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Use of certain anticonvulsants might decrease the effectiveness of POCs (154-156).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [154]
- Not checked yetcites [155]
- Not checked yetcites [156]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No drug interactions have been reported among women with epilepsy receiving lamotrigine and POCs (157).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [157]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that for women taking SSRIs, the use of hormonal contraceptives was not associated with differences in effectiveness of the SSRI for treatment or in adverse events when compared with women not taking hormonal contraceptives (158).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [158]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“no clinical or pharmacokinetic studies were identified to explore potential drug-drug interactions”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“CHC use might decrease BMD in adolescents, especially in those choosing very low-dose formulations (COCs containing <30 µg ethinyl estradiol) (46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46]
- Not checked yetcites [47]
- Not checked yetcites [48]
- Not checked yetcites [49]
- Not checked yetcites [50]
- Not checked yetcites [51]
- Not checked yetcites [52]
- Not checked yetcites [53]
- Not checked yetcites [54]
- Not checked yetcites [55]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Use of DMPA is a category 1 because its effectiveness is not decreased by use of rifampin or rifabutin.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No evidence specifically examined the use of POCs with St John's wort.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No evidence specifically examined the use of POCs with SSRIs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“CHC use has little to no effect on BMD in premenopausal women (60)(61)(62)(63)(64)(65)(66)(67)(68)(69)(70)(71)(72)(73)(74)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [60]
- Not checked yetcites [61]
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
- Not checked yetcites [65]
- Not checked yetcites [66]
- Not checked yetcites [67]
- Not checked yetcites [68]
- Not checked yetcites [69]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Research examining the interaction between COCs and BMI on VTE risk is limited, particularly for women in the highest BMI categories (BMI ≥35 kg/m 2 ).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“however, studies have been inadequately designed to determine whether a risk for either serious or subtle long-term effects exists (88).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“COC users who smoked were at increased risk for cardiovascular diseases, especially myocardial infarction, compared with those who did not smoke.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104]
- Not checked yetcites [105]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
- Not checked yetcites [107]
- Not checked yetcites [108]
- Not checked yetcites [109]
- Not checked yetcites [110]
- Not checked yetcites [111]
- Not checked yetcites [112]
- Not checked yetcites [113]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Adverse health outcomes or manifestations of exogenous estrogen in infants exposed to CHCs through breast milk have not been demonstrated; however, studies have been inadequately designed to determine whether a risk for either serious or subtle long-term effects exists (88).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Clinical studies demonstrate conflicting results regarding effects on breastfeeding continuation or exclusivity in women exposed to COCs during lactation.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence on women using the ring immediately after first trimester medical or surgical abortion found no serious adverse events and no infection related to use of the combined vaginal ring during 3 cycles of follow-up postabortion (103).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [103]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Women who started taking COCs immediately after first trimester medical or surgical abortion did not experience more side effects or adverse vaginal bleeding outcomes or clinically significant changes in coagulation parameters than did women who used a placebo, an IUD, a nonhormonal contraceptive method, or delayed COC initiation (96-102).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [96]
- Not checked yetcites [97]
- Not checked yetcites [98]
- Not checked yetcites [99]
- Not checked yetcites [100]
- Not checked yetcites [101]
- Not checked yetcites [102]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Studies also showed an increased risk for myocardial infarction with increasing number of cigarettes smoked per day (104-116).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104]
- Not checked yetcites [105]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
- Not checked yetcites [107]
- Not checked yetcites [108]
- Not checked yetcites [109]
- Not checked yetcites [110]
- Not checked yetcites [111]
- Not checked yetcites [112]
- Not checked yetcites [113]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although the absolute risk for VTE in otherwise healthy women of reproductive age is small, obese women are at 2-3 times higher risk for VTE than normal weight women regardless of COC use.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that obese women who use COCs do not have a higher risk for acute myocardial infarction or stroke than do obese nonusers (117).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“obese women are at 2-3 times higher risk for VTE than normal weight women regardless of COC use.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“might preserve bone mass in those who are perimenopausal (75)(76)(77)(78)(79)(80)(81)(82)(83).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75]
- Not checked yetcites [76]
- Not checked yetcites [77]
- Not checked yetcites [78]
- Not checked yetcites [79]
- Not checked yetcites [80]
- Not checked yetcites [81]
- Not checked yetcites [82]
- Not checked yetcites [83]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No consistent effects on infant growth or illness have been reported.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Obese women who use COCs are more likely than obese women who do not use COCs to experience VTE.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One study examined use of CHCs during the postpartum period and found that VTE rates were higher for CHC users compared with nonusers at all time points postpartum (89).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests obese women are no more likely to gain weight during COC or vaginal ring use than normal weight or overweight women (117,127).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
- Not checked yetcites [127]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For many common psychotropic agents, limited or no theoretical concern exits for clinically significant drug interactions when co-administered with hormonal contraceptives.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The absolute risks for acute myocardial infarction and VTE in this population remained small (115,130,142,143,145-151).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 3/4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
- Not checked yetcites [130]
- Not checked yetcites [142]
- Not checked yetcites [143]
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [146]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
- Not checked yetcites [148]
- Not checked yetcites [149]
- Not checked yetcites [150]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women with hypertension, COC users were at higher risk than nonusers for stroke, acute myocardial infarction, and peripheral arterial disease (104,106,113-116,129-143).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 3/4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
- Not checked yetcites [113]
- Not checked yetcites [114]
- Not checked yetcites [115]
- Not checked yetcites [116]
- Not checked yetcites [129]
- Not checked yetcites [130]
- Not checked yetcites [131]
- Not checked yetcites [132]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Among women with thrombogenic mutations, COC users had a twofold to twentyfold higher risk for thrombosis than did nonusers (152-175).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 152-175
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Effectiveness of the patch might be reduced in women >90 kg (126).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, either no or very limited data exist examining potential interactions for these classes of medications.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One study demonstrated that among women with superficial venous thrombosis, the risk for VTE was higher in oral contraceptive users compared with nonusers (176).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > TABLE D1. (Continued) Classifications for combined hormonal contraceptives, including pill, patch, and ring
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176]
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Women with a history of high blood pressure in pregnancy who also used COCs had a higher risk for myocardial infarction and VTE than did COC users who did not have a history of high blood pressure during pregnancy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 3/4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
- Not checked yetcites [130]
- Not checked yetcites [142]
- Not checked yetcites [143]
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [146]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
- Not checked yetcites [148]
- Not checked yetcites [149]
- Not checked yetcites [150]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No direct evidence exists about the safety of CHCs among women with peripartum cardiomyopathy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Discontinuation of COCs in women with hypertension might improve blood pressure control (144).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 3/4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [144]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No data exist that evaluate the increased risk for VTE among women with multiple sclerosis using CHCs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No data exist that evaluate the increased risk for VTE among women with IBD using CHCs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most persons who choose sterilization remain satisfied with their decision.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, HIV infection is classified as category 3 for spermicides and diaphragms (see HIV section).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“similar to the proportion of women who report regretting their husbands' vasectomy (6%) (4)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Regret among men about vasectomy has been reported to be approximately 5% (3)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although evidence is limited, use of female condoms can provide protection from acquisition and transmission of STDs (12).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Contraceptive Method Choice
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12]
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for HIV infection and other STDs, including chlamydial infection, gonococcal infection, and trichomoniasis (12).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Contraceptive Method Choice
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For women with HIV infection who are not clinically well or not receiving ARV therapy, this condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Box 2
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IUD: The IUD is not indicated during pregnancy and should not be used because of the risk for serious pelvic infection and septic spontaneous abortion.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
- Also stated in: § Additional information · plain
“Gestational trophoblastic disease This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Box 2
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Additional information · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Initiation of LNG-IUDs immediately postpartum had no other harmful effect on infant health, growth, or development (63,64).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Early postpartum placement has similar or increased risk for expulsion compared with immediate postplacental placement.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CDC reviewed all available evidence and agreed that the data were not sufficiently conclusive to change current guidance.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“ECPs: ECPs might be less effective among women with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 than among women with BMI <25 kg/m 2 .”
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
“ECPs might be less effective among women with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 than among women with BMI <25 kg/m 2 .”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implants, DMPA, POP: Theoretical concern exists that interactions between FPV and hormonal contraceptives leading to decreased levels of FPV might diminish effectiveness of the antiretroviral drug.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IUD: Women who have experienced sexual assault are at increased risk for STDs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence (breastfeeding): Two randomized controlled trials found conflicting results on breastfeeding outcomes when LNG-IUDs were initiated immediately postpartum compared with 6-8 weeks postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implants, DMPA, POP, CHCs: Certain drugs to treat cystic fibrosis (e.g., lumacaftor) might reduce effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives, including oral, injectable, transdermal, and implantable contraceptives.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Mean UPA concentrations in breast milk decrease markedly from 0 to 24-48 hours and then slowly decrease over 5 days (3).”
- Also stated in: § BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception · plain
“Mean UPA concentrations in breast milk decrease markedly from 0 to 24-48 hours and then slowly decrease over 5 days (2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“ECPs: Strong CYP3A4 inducers might reduce the effectiveness of ECPs.”
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
“Strong CYP3A4 inducers might reduce the effectiveness of ECPs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidence: Studies suggest that immediate postplacental (<10 minutes) and early postpartum (10 minutes up until 72 hours) placement of Cu-IUDs and LNG-IUDs is associated with increased risk for expulsion compared with interval placement (i.e., not related to pregnancy).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Breastfeeding women using IUDs do not have an increased risk for certain IUD-related adverse events including expulsion, infection, pain, or bleeding compared with nonbreastfeeding women.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence: Antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with a higher risk for both arterial and venous thrombosis (95,96)”
- Also stated in: § BOX C1. · plain
“Antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with a higher risk for both arterial and venous thrombosis (100,101).”
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · plain
“Antiphospholipid antibodies are associated with a higher risk for both arterial and venous thrombosis (198,199).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [95]
- Not checked yetcites [96]
- Not checked yetcites [100]
- Not checked yetcites [101]
- Not checked yetcites [198]
- Not checked yetcites [199]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § BOX C1. · plain
In the paper
“Systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥100 mm Hg are associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Box 2
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, when a woman becomes pregnant during IUD use, the relative likelihood of ectopic pregnancy increases substantially.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence: Risk for complications from immediate versus delayed insertion of an IUD after abortion did not differ.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidence: No direct evidence exists on the use of POCs among women with acute DVT/PE.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidence: No direct evidence exists on the safety of IUDs among women with peripartum cardiomyopathy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Expulsion was greater when an IUD was inserted after a second trimester abortion than when inserted after a first trimester abortion.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The frequency of psychiatric hospitalizations for women with bipolar disorder or depression did not significantly differ among women using DMPA, LNG-IUD, Cu-IUD, or sterilization (99).”
- Also stated in: § BOX C1. · plain
“The frequency of psychiatric hospitalizations for women with bipolar disorder or depression did not significantly differ among women using DMPA, LNG-IUD, Cu-IUD, or sterilization (106).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [99]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § BOX C1. · plain
In the paper
“Limited indirect evidence from noncomparative studies did not demonstrate any cases of arrhythmia or infective endocarditis in women with cardiac disease who used IUDs (75).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: The absolute risk for ectopic pregnancy is extremely low because of the high effectiveness of IUDs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence: Limited evidence indicates that insertion of the LNG-IUD does not pose major bleeding risks in women receiving chronic anticoagulant therapy (70)(71)(72)(73).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [70]
- Not checked yetcites [71]
- Not checked yetcites [72]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence demonstrated that women using LNG-IUDs do not have an increased risk for ischemic stroke compared with women not using hormonal contraceptives (98).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [98]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Safety or expulsion for postabortion insertion of an LNG-IUD did not differ from that of a Cu-IUD (66).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [66]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Evidence: The LNG-IUD might be a useful treatment for menorrhagia in women with severe thrombocytopenia (73).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Many women with SLE can be considered good candidates for most contraceptive methods, including hormonal contraceptives (73,77-94).”
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · plain
“Many women with SLE can be considered good candidates for most contraceptive methods, including hormonal contraceptives (73,77-94).”
- Also stated in: § BOX C1. · plain
“Many women with SLE can be considered good candidates for most contraceptive methods, including hormonal contraceptives (81-99).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [73]
- Not checked yetcites [77]
- Not checked yetcites [78]
- Not checked yetcites [79]
- Not checked yetcites [80]
- Not checked yetcites [81]
- Not checked yetcites [82]
- Not checked yetcites [83]
- Not checked yetcites [84]
- Not checked yetcites [85]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For all subconditions of SLE, no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present.
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · plain
In the paper
“Among IUD users treated for PID, clinical course did not differ regardless of whether the IUD was removed or left in place (116).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [116]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Among women with uterine fibroids using an LNG-IUD, most experienced improvements in serum levels of hemoglobin, hematocrit, and ferritin and in menstrual blood loss (115).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Risk for PID among women with risk factors for STDs is low (125).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Women who undergo same-day STD screening and IUD insertion have low incidence rates of PID.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that women using an IUD after uterine evacuation for a molar pregnancy are not at greater risk for postmolar trophoblastic disease than are women using other methods of contraception (113).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Gestational trophoblastic disease
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [113]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.
In the paper
“Algorithms for predicting PID among women with risk factors for STDs have poor predictive value.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Rates of expulsion found in noncomparative studies ranged from 0%-20% (115).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women at risk for HIV, Cu-IUD use did not increase risk for HIV acquisition (126-136).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126]
- Not checked yetcites [127]
- Not checked yetcites [128]
- Not checked yetcites [129]
- Not checked yetcites [130]
- Not checked yetcites [131]
- Not checked yetcites [132]
- Not checked yetcites [133]
- Not checked yetcites [134]
- Not checked yetcites [135]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that no adverse side effects occur when implants (Norplant) or progestin-only injectables (NET-EN) are initiated after first trimester abortion (52-55).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52]
- Not checked yetcites [53]
- Not checked yetcites [54]
- Not checked yetcites [55]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Other studies found that initiation of POPs, injectables, and implants at ≤6 weeks postpartum compared with nonhormonal use had no detrimental effect on breastfeeding outcomes or infant health, growth, and development in the first year postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50]
- Not checked yetcites [51]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, one large study suggests that women who choose DMPA might be at higher risk for fracture before initiation (1).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two small, randomized controlled trials found no adverse impact on breastfeeding with initiation of etonogestrel implants within 48 hours postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50]
- Not checked yetcites [51]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence on the use of the LNG-IUD among women with insulin-dependent or non-insulin-dependent diabetes suggests that these methods have little effect on short-term or long-term diabetes control (e.g., glycosylated hemoglobin levels), hemostatic markers, or lipid profile (138,139).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138]
- Not checked yetcites [139]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests use of certain anticonvulsants does not interfere with the contraceptive effectiveness of the LNG-IUD (142).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [142]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among adult women, generally no association has been found between baseline weight and weight gain among DMPA users compared with nonusers.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [56]
- Not checked yetcites [57]
- Not checked yetcites [58]
- Not checked yetcites [59]
- Not checked yetcites [60]
- Not checked yetcites [61]
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
- Not checked yetcites [65]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No drug interactions have been reported among women with epilepsy who are receiving lamotrigine and using the LNG-IUD (143).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [143]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Four case reports of transplant patients using IUDs provided inconsistent results, including beneficial effects and contraceptive failures (141).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
plaincorrelationaln = 4- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No comparative studies have examined IUD use among transplant patients.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One cross-sectional survey found that rifabutin had no impact on the effectiveness of the LNG-IUD (142).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [142]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Studies generally find no effect of POCs other than DMPA on BMD (1-48).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 1-48
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence shows a weak association with fracture.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 1-48
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Overall, studies found that initiation of POPs, injectables, and implants at >6 weeks postpartum compared with nonhormonal use had no detrimental effect on breastfeeding outcomes or infant health, growth, and development in the first year postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence demonstrated no substantial decrease in effectiveness of oral contraceptives among women who underwent laparoscopic placement of an adjustable gastric band (74).”
- Also stated in: § History of bariatric surgery · boosted
“Limited evidence demonstrated no substantial decrease in effectiveness of oral contraceptives among women who underwent laparoscopic placement of an adjustable gastric band (128).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74]
- Not checked yetcites [128]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § History of bariatric surgery · boosted
In the paper
“Limited indirect evidence from noncomparative studies of women with cardiac disease demonstrated few cases of hypertension, thromboembolism, and heart failure in women with cardiac disease using POPs and DMPA (79).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [79]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“POCs had no adverse effects on serum lipid levels in women with a history of gestational diabetes in two small studies (113,114).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [113]
- Not checked yetcites [114]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Studies measuring whether hormonal contraceptive methods affect plasma HIV viral load generally have found no effect (109-111).”
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · plain
“Studies measuring whether hormonal contraceptive methods affect plasma HIV viral load generally have found no effect (233-235).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109]
- Not checked yetcites [110]
- Not checked yetcites [111]
- Not checked yetcites [233]
- Not checked yetcites [234]
- Not checked yetcites [235]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · plain
In the paper
“Limited evidence demonstrated that women using POPs, DMPA, or implants do not have an increased risk for ischemic stroke compared with nonusers (104).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Among women with persistent human papillomavirus infection, long-term DMPA use (≥5 years) might increase the risk for carcinoma in situ and invasive carcinoma (107).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Data on other POC methods and other adverse outcomes including weight gain are limited (56-73).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [56]
- Not checked yetcites [57]
- Not checked yetcites [58]
- Not checked yetcites [59]
- Not checked yetcites [60]
- Not checked yetcites [61]
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
- Not checked yetcites [65]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence is inconsistent about the development of noninsulin-dependent diabetes among users of POCs with a history of gestational diabetes (115-118).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
- Not checked yetcites [116]
- Not checked yetcites [117]
- Not checked yetcites [118]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence shows no consistent pattern of improvement or worsening of rheumatoid arthritis with use of oral contraceptives, progesterone, or estrogen (102).”
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · plain
“Limited evidence shows no consistent pattern of improvement or worsening of rheumatoid arthritis with use of oral contraceptives, progesterone, or estrogen (200).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [102]
- Not checked yetcites [200]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that use of COCs or oral contraceptives (type not specified) among women with multiple sclerosis does not worsen the clinical course of disease (105).”
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · hedged
“Limited evidence suggests that use of COCs or oral contraceptives (type not specified) among women with multiple sclerosis does not worsen the clinical course of disease (206).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [105]
- Not checked yetcites [206]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Peripartum cardiomyopathy · hedged
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that among women with hypertension, those who used POPs or progestin-only injectables had a small increased risk for cardiovascular events compared with women who did not use these methods (75).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Among women with uncomplicated schistosomiasis, limited evidence showed that DMPA use had no adverse effects on liver function (112).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [112]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited direct evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptive use does not influence either progression or regression of liver lesions among women with focal nodular hyperplasia (124).”
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · hedged
“Limited direct evidence suggests that hormonal contraceptive use does not influence either progression or regression of liver lesions among women with focal nodular hyperplasia (266).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [124]
- Not checked yetcites [266]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Ovarian cancer · hedged
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women with insulin-dependent or noninsulin-dependent diabetes, limited evidence on use of POCs (POPs, DMPA, and LNG implant) suggests that these methods have little effect on short-term or long-term diabetes control (e.g., glycosylated hemoglobin levels), hemostatic markers, or lipid profile (119-122).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [119]
- Not checked yetcites [120]
- Not checked yetcites [121]
- Not checked yetcites [122]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Five studies found no significant increase in pregnancy rates among women using implants and NVP compared with implants alone (141-144,149).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
- Not checked yetcites [142]
- Not checked yetcites [143]
- Not checked yetcites [144]
- Not checked yetcites [149]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“another study of LNG implant users found no difference in pregnancy rates with EFV compared with no EFV (144).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [144]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence suggests drug interactions between EFV and certain hormonal contraceptives.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
- Not checked yetcites [141]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“NRTIs do not appear to have significant risk for interactions with hormonal contraceptive methods (134-139).”
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
“NRTIs do not appear to have significant risk for interactions with hormonal contraceptive methods (269-274).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [134]
- Not checked yetcites [135]
- Not checked yetcites [136]
- Not checked yetcites [137]
- Not checked yetcites [138]
- Not checked yetcites [139]
- Not checked yetcites [269]
- Not checked yetcites [270]
- Not checked yetcites [271]
- Not checked yetcites [272]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Solid organ transplantation · hedged
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Very limited evidence suggests that cystic fibrosis does not impair the effectiveness of hormonal contraception (125).”
- Also stated in: § Cystic fibrosis · hedged
“Very limited evidence suggests that cystic fibrosis does not impair the effectiveness of hormonal contraception (267).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 1 2 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
- Not checked yetcites [267]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Cystic fibrosis · hedged
In the paper
“Risk for disease relapse among women with IBD using oral contraceptives (most studies did not specify formulation) did not increase significantly from that for nonusers (123).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [123]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These interactions might reduce the effectiveness of the hormonal contraceptive.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
- Not checked yetcites [141]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“No significant effects were found on HIV disease progression in women using LNG implants and EFV compared with no ARVs (143).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [143]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that use of COCs or oral contraceptives (type not specified) among women with cystic fibrosis is not associated with worsening of disease severity.”
- Also stated in: § Cystic fibrosis · hedged
“Limited evidence suggests that use of COCs or oral contraceptives (type not specified) among women with cystic fibrosis is not associated with worsening of disease severity.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 1 2 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
- Not checked yetcites [267]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Cystic fibrosis · hedged
In the paper
“One study found no ovulations or changes in DMPA concentrations (145).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [145]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the interaction of rifampin or rifabutin with POPs and etonogestrel implants is not harmful to women, it is likely to reduce the effectiveness of POPs and etonogestrel implants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One pharmacokinetic study demonstrated increased progestin concentrations with use of POPs and ATV/r compared with POPs alone (152).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [152]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“No effect was found on HIV disease progression with use of NVP and DMPA or LNG implants (143,145,147-149,151).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [143]
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
- Not checked yetcites [148]
- Not checked yetcites [149]
- Not checked yetcites [151]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No known harm to the woman, the course of her pregnancy, or the fetus occurs if CHCs are inadvertently used during pregnancy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the interaction of rifampin or rifabutin with POPs and etonogestrel implants is not harmful to women, it is likely to reduce the effectiveness of POPs and etonogestrel implants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any potential effect on contraceptive effectiveness is likely to be lower with DMPA than with other POCs because of the higher dose of DMPA.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two studies found no increased risk for pregnancy in women using implants (141,142).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
- Not checked yetcites [142]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the interaction of certain anticonvulsants with POPs and etonogestrel implants is not harmful to women, it is likely to reduce the effectiveness of POPs and etonogestrel implants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the interaction of certain anticonvulsants with POPs and etonogestrel implants is not harmful to women, it is likely to reduce the effectiveness of POPs and etonogestrel implants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two studies found contraceptive hormones increased in women using LPV/r with DMPA or etonogestrel implants (140,153).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
- Not checked yetcites [153]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Four studies found no significant increase in pregnancy rates among women using DMPA or other contraceptive injectables and NVP compared with DMPA or other contraceptive injectables alone (141,144,147,150).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
- Not checked yetcites [144]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
- Not checked yetcites [150]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“NFV concentrations were decreased with concomitant DMPA use (145,147).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The risk for ischemic stroke is increased among women using COCs, compared with women not using COCs (104,202).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [104]
- Not checked yetcites [202]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The only study to examine migraine type found that the risk for ischemic stroke among women with migraine with aura was increased to a similar level among both oral contraceptive users and nonusers, compared with women without migraine (201).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [201]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Superficial venous thrombosis might be associated with an increased risk for VTE.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > TABLE D1. (Continued) Classifications for combined hormonal contraceptives, including pill, patch, and ring
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Many women with SLE can be considered good candidates for most contraceptive methods, including hormonal contraceptives (179-197).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [179]
- Not checked yetcites [180]
- Not checked yetcites [181]
- Not checked yetcites [182]
- Not checked yetcites [183]
- Not checked yetcites [184]
- Not checked yetcites [185]
- Not checked yetcites [186]
- Not checked yetcites [187]
- Not checked yetcites [188]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Persons with systemic lupus erythematosus are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The risk for ischemic stroke is also increased among women with migraine with aura, compared with women without migraine (203-205).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203]
- Not checked yetcites [204]
- Not checked yetcites [205]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence on women with low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions found use of the vaginal ring did not worsen the condition (9).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The development of non-insulin-dependent diabetes in women with a history of gestational diabetes is not increased by use of COCs (243-250).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [243]
- Not checked yetcites [244]
- Not checked yetcites [245]
- Not checked yetcites [246]
- Not checked yetcites [247]
- Not checked yetcites [248]
- Not checked yetcites [249]
- Not checked yetcites [250]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Risk for side effects with COC use was not higher among women with dysmenorrhea than among women not using COCs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Endometriosis 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [210]
- Not checked yetcites [211]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Among women with persistent human papillomavirus infection, long-term COC use (≥5 years) might increase the risk for carcinoma in situ and invasive carcinoma (213).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [213]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One small study of women with bipolar disorder found that oral contraceptives did not significantly change mood across the menstrual cycle (207).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [207]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence suggests that use of COCs during chemotherapy does not significantly affect the regression or treatment of postmolar trophoblastic disease compared with women who used a nonhormonal contraceptive method or DMPA during chemotherapy (212).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Gestational trophoblastic disease
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [212]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“After molar pregnancy evacuation, the balance of evidence found COC use did not increase the risk for postmolar trophoblastic disease, and β-hCG levels regressed more rapidly in some COC users than in nonusers (212).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Gestational trophoblastic disease
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [212]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Likewise, lipid levels appear to be unaffected by COC use (251-253).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [251]
- Not checked yetcites [252]
- Not checked yetcites [253]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, evidence does not suggest that the increased risk for breast cancer among women with either a family history of breast cancer or breast cancer susceptibility genes is modified by the use of COCs (214-231).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Cervical cancer (awaiting treatment) 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [214]
- Not checked yetcites [215]
- Not checked yetcites [216]
- Not checked yetcites [217]
- Not checked yetcites [218]
- Not checked yetcites [219]
- Not checked yetcites [220]
- Not checked yetcites [221]
- Not checked yetcites [222]
- Not checked yetcites [223]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Some COC users had a reduction in pain and bleeding (210,211).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Endometriosis 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [210]
- Not checked yetcites [211]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“After molar pregnancy evacuation, the balance of evidence found COC use did not increase the risk for postmolar trophoblastic disease, and β-hCG levels regressed more rapidly in some COC users than in nonusers (212).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Gestational trophoblastic disease
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [212]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women with uncomplicated schistosomiasis, COC use had no adverse effects on liver function (236-242).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [236]
- Not checked yetcites [237]
- Not checked yetcites [238]
- Not checked yetcites [239]
- Not checked yetcites [240]
- Not checked yetcites [241]
- Not checked yetcites [242]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In one case-control study, risk for ectopic pregnancy compared with intrauterine pregnancy did not increase after repeated use of LNG ECPs compared with nonuse (1).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One study demonstrated no clinically relevant pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic changes in women using COCs and ETR compared with COCs alone (281).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [281]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Evidence suggests that poor pregnancy outcomes are rare among pregnant women who used ECPs during conception cycle or early in pregnancy (1).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Five studies found no significant differences in pregnancy rates among women using COCs and NVP compared with women using COCs alone (275-277,282,283).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [275]
- Not checked yetcites [276]
- Not checked yetcites [277]
- Not checked yetcites [282]
- Not checked yetcites [283]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, one study reported discontinuations of COC use in two (8%) of 26 women as a result of serious medical complications, and in one case report, a woman developed cholestasis associated with high-dose COC use (268).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [268]
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two studies found conflicting results on ovulations in women receiving COCs and EFV compared with EFV alone (278,279).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [278]
- Not checked yetcites [279]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One study demonstrated no clinical significant pharmacokinetic changes or adverse events in women using COCs and RPV compared with COCs alone (287).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [287]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One pharmacokinetic study demonstrated decreased estrogen but increased progestin concentrations in women using COCs and ATV/r compared with COCs alone (288).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [288]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Absorption of COCs among women with mild ulcerative colitis and no or small ileal resections was similar to the absorption among healthy women (264).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [264]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence of COC and patch users indicated no overall changes in biochemical measures.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [268]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“For women who are carriers, COC use does not appear to trigger liver failure or severe dysfunction.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [265]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, women with IBD are at higher risk than unaffected women for VTE (264).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [264]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Risk for disease relapse was not significantly higher among women with IBD using oral contraceptives (most studies did not specify type) than among nonusers (264).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [264]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, one study reported discontinuations of COC use in two (8%) of 26 women as a result of serious medical complications, and in one case report, a woman developed cholestasis associated with high-dose COC use (268).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [268]
plaindirectn = 26- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Evidence is limited for COC use during active hepatitis (265).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [265]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Findings might not apply to women with Crohn's disease or more extensive bowel resections.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated generally no changes in EFV concentrations with concomitant COC use (279,280).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [279]
- Not checked yetcites [280]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated generally no changes in NVP concentrations with concomitant COC use (278,285,286).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [278]
- Not checked yetcites [285]
- Not checked yetcites [286]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated decreases in ethinyl estradiol and progestin concentrations in women receiving COCs and EFV compared with COCs alone (279,280).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [279]
- Not checked yetcites [280]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Three studies reported no ovulations among women receiving COCs and NVP (278,283,284).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [278]
- Not checked yetcites [283]
- Not checked yetcites [284]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“One pharmacokinetic study demonstrated that LNG passes to breast milk but in minimal quantities (1).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Breastfeeding outcomes do not seem to differ between women exposed to LNG and those who are not exposed.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Limited evidence from secondary data analyses suggests that women with BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 experience an increased risk for pregnancy after use of LNG compared with women with BMI <25 kg/m 2 .”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4]
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Solid organ transplantation This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Use of diaphragms and spermicides might increase risk for urinary tract infection.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For women with HIV infection who are not clinically well or not receiving ARV therapy, this condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No medical conditions exist for which use of the lactational amenorrhea method for contraception is restricted.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Severe cirrhosis is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Schistosomiasis with fibrosis of the liver is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hepatocellular adenoma and malignant liver tumors are associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Breast cancer is associated with increased risk of adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sickle cell disease This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Tuberculosis This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“HIV can be transmitted from mother to infant through breastfeeding.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
- Not checked yetcites [4]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lactational amenorrhea method does not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ovarian cancer This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“A small pharmacokinetic study found that concomitant efavirenz use decreased LNG levels in women taking LNG ECPs (0.75 mg) by 56% compared with LNG ECPs alone (5).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [5]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 76
- Probably not a substantial claim. 51
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Limited direct evidence on an association between POC use and transmission of HIV to noninfected partners, as well as studies measuring genital viral shedding as a proxy for infectivity, have had mixed results.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“no studies have suggested an increased risk for HIV acquisition with etonogestrel implants although data are limited (108).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No evidence is available about hormonal contraceptive use among women with hepatocellular adenoma.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > HIV infection
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence is inconsistent about whether CHC use affects fracture risk (34)(35)(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45), although three recent studies show no effect (34,35,45).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34]
- Not checked yetcites [35]
- Not checked yetcites [45]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although clinical data are limited, studies with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics outcomes raise concern that St. John's wort might decrease effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives, including increased risk for breakthrough bleeding and ovulation and increased metabolism of estrogen and progestin.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [159]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Rates were significantly different only after 13 weeks postpartum; however, the numbers needed to harm were lowest in the first 6 weeks postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Risk for pregnancy during the first 21 days postpartum is very low but increases after that point; ovulation before first menses is common (95).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [95]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“VTE risk is increased during pregnancy and the postpartum period; this risk is most pronounced in the first 3 weeks after delivery, decreasing to near baseline levels by 42 days postpartum (90)(91)(92)(93)(94).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [90]
- Not checked yetcites [91]
- Not checked yetcites [92]
- Not checked yetcites [93]
- Not checked yetcites [94]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Limited evidence demonstrated no substantial decrease in effectiveness of oral contraceptives among women who underwent a biliopancreatic diversion; however, evidence from pharmacokinetic studies reported conflicting results of oral contraceptive effectiveness among women who underwent a jejunoileal bypass (128).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > History of bariatric surgery
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [128]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One study suggested that among women with varicose veins, the rate of VTE and superficial venous thrombosis was higher in oral contraceptive users compared with nonusers; however, statistical significance was not reported and the number of events was small (176).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 4
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [176]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Limited indirect evidence from noncomparative studies of women with cardiac disease demonstrated few cases of hypertension and transient ischemic attack in women with cardiac disease using COCs.No cases of heart failure were reported (177).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [177]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, a small proportion of women regret this decision (1%-26% from different studies, with higher rates of regret reported by women who were younger at sterilization) (1,2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No drug interaction between ARV therapy and barrier method use is known.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Toxic shock syndrome has been reported in association with contraceptive sponge and diaphragm use.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Approximately 45% of all pregnancies that occur in the United States are unintended (1)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“with associated increased risks for adverse maternal and infant health outcomes (2)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“and increased health care costs (3)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Any potential effect on contraceptive effectiveness is likely to be lower with DMPA than with other POCs because of the higher dose of DMPA.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Concern exists that interactions between NFV and POCs might decrease NFV levels.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IUDs: Insertion of IUDs among postpartum women is safe and does not appear to increase health risks associated with IUD use such as infection.”
- Also stated in: § BOX B1. Categories for classifying intrauterine devices · hedged
“Clarification: Insertion of IUDs among postpartum women is safe and does not appear to increase health risks associated with IUD use such as infection.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § BOX B1. Categories for classifying intrauterine devices · hedged
In the paper
“According to CDC STD treatment guidelines, routine presumptive treatment of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomonas is recommended after sexual assault (2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Evidence for infection, perforation, and removals for pain or bleeding are limited; however, these events are rare .”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The risk for perforation is increased independently among breastfeeding women and among women ≤36 weeks postpartum, compared with non-postpartum women; however, the absolute risk for perforation remains low 65).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [65]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When direct evidence was limited or not available, indirect evidence (e.g., evidence on surrogate outcomes or among healthy women) and theoretical issues were considered and either added to direct evidence within a systematic review or separately compiled for presentation to the meeting participants.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed for reporting systematic reviews (8,9), and strength and quality of the evidence were assigned using the system of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (10).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Methods
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8]
- Not checked yetcites [9]
- Not checked yetcites [10]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“UPA: Breastfeeding is not recommended for 24 hours after taking UPA because it is excreted in breast milk with highest concentrations in the first 24 hours, and maximum maternal serum levels are reached 1-3 hours after administration.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“ECPs: Although this method is not indicated for a woman with a known or suspected pregnancy, no harm to the woman, the course of her pregnancy, or the fetus if ECPs are inadvertently used is known to exist.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The drug interaction likely involves CYP3A4 pathways; POCs have less effect on CYP3A4 enzymes than CHCs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Persons with cystic fibrosis are at increased risk for diabetes, liver disease, gallbladder disease, and VTE (particularly related to use of central venous catheters) and are frequently prescribed antibiotics.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence (breastfeeding): Initiation of LNG-IUDs at 4 weeks postpartum or later demonstrated no detrimental effect on breastfeeding outcomes and no harmful effect on infant health, growth, or development (63,64).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“IUD: No known interaction exists between ARV therapy and IUD use.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implants, DMPA, POP: Theoretically, drug interactions might occur between certain ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors and certain hormonal contraceptives that might reduce the effectiveness of the hormonal contraceptive.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CHCs: Theoretical concern exists that increased levels of ethinyl estradiol because of interactions with ATV might increase the risk for adverse events.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although immediate postplacental placement at the time of cesarean delivery might have increased risk for expulsion compared with interval placement, risk appears lower than that for placement at the time of vaginal delivery.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite this, no safety concerns exist.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Completed systematic reviews were peer reviewed by two or three experts and then provided to participants before the expert meeting.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Feedback also was received from three external reviewers, composed of health care providers and researchers who had not participated in the update meetings.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Use of female condoms can provide protection from transmission of STDs, although data are limited.”
- Also stated in: § Additional information · plain
“Use of female condoms can provide protection from transmission of STDs, although data are limited.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Appendix B Classifications for Intrauterine Devices
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Additional information · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CHCs: Evidence suggests drug interactions between certain protease inhibitors and certain hormonal contraceptives.These interactions might reduce the effectiveness of the hormonal contraceptive.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Implants, DMPA, POP, CHCs: Evidence suggests drug interactions between efavirenz and certain hormonal contraceptives.These interactions might reduce the effectiveness of the hormonal contraceptive.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Abbreviations and Acronyms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence: Data conflict about whether IUD use is associated with infertility among nulliparous women, although well-conducted studies suggest no increased risk (1-9).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX B1. Categories for classifying intrauterine devices
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
- Not checked yetcites [2]
- Not checked yetcites [3]
- Not checked yetcites [4]
- Not checked yetcites [5]
- Not checked yetcites [6]
- Not checked yetcites [7]
- Not checked yetcites [8]
- Not checked yetcites [9]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: Theoretical concern exists that postpartum insertion of an IUD in a women with recent chorioamnionitis or current endometritis might be associated with increased complications.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: Theoretical concern exists about the effect of LNG on lipids.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: IUD insertion might induce cardiac arrhythmias in healthy women; women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence from studies examining the treatment effects of the LNG-IUD among women with heavy or prolonged bleeding reported no increase in adverse effects and found the LNG-IUD to be beneficial in treating menorrhagia (100-107).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100]
- Not checked yetcites [101]
- Not checked yetcites [102]
- Not checked yetcites [103]
- Not checked yetcites [104]
- Not checked yetcites [105]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
- Not checked yetcites [107]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When multiple risk factors do exist, risk for cardiovascular disease might increase substantially.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Comment: According to the American Heart Association, administration of prophylactic antibiotics solely to prevent endocarditis is not recommended for patients who undergo genitourinary tract procedures, including insertion or removal of IUDs (74).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Valvular heart disease
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although findings on the risk for venous thrombosis with the use of POCs in otherwise healthy women are inconsistent, any small increased risk is substantially less than that with COCs (67-69).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [67]
- Not checked yetcites [68]
- Not checked yetcites [69]
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A single reading of blood pressure level is not sufficient to classify a woman as hypertensive.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: Insertion of an IUD might substantially worsen the condition.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comment: The LNG-IUD might be a useful treatment for menorrhagia in women receiving long-term anticoagulation therapy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Clarification (breastfeeding):
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Among women with endometrial hyperplasia, no adverse health events occurred with LNG-IUD use; most women experienced disease regression (114).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Category Clarifications/Evidence/Comments Cu-IUD LNG-IUD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [114]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“IUD use did not adversely affect progression of HIV during 6-45 months of follow-up or when compared with hormonal contraceptive use among HIV-infected women.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women who had an IUD inserted, the absolute risk for subsequent PID was low among women with STD at the time of insertion but greater than among women with no STD at the time of IUD insertion (117-123).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [117]
- Not checked yetcites [118]
- Not checked yetcites [119]
- Not checked yetcites [120]
- Not checked yetcites [121]
- Not checked yetcites [122]
- Not checked yetcites [123]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“LNG-IUD use among women with endometriosis decreased dysmenorrhea, pelvic pain, and dyspareunia (108-112).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108]
- Not checked yetcites [109]
- Not checked yetcites [110]
- Not checked yetcites [111]
- Not checked yetcites [112]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Rates of LNG-IUD expulsion were higher in women with uterine fibroids (11%) than in women without fibroids (0%-3%); these findings were either not statistically significant or significance testing was not conducted (115).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [115]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, IUD use among HIV-infected women was not associated with increased risk for transmission to sex partners or with increased genital viral shedding (137).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Among IUD users, limited evidence shows a low risk for PID among HIV-infected women using IUDs and no higher risk for pelvic infectious complications in HIV-infected than in HIV-noninfected women or among women with varying degrees of HIV severity.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [137]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Most studies have found that women lose BMD during DMPA use but recover BMD after discontinuation.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites 1-48
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although two case reports described three women with IBD who experienced exacerbation of disease 5 days-25 months after LNG-IUD insertion, no comparative studies have examined the safety of IUD use among women with IBD (140).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Uterine fibroids 2 2
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Evidence is mixed for adolescent DMPA users, with some studies observing greater weight gain among obese compared with normal weight users but other studies showing no association; methodologic differences across studies might account for the differences in findings.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [56]
- Not checked yetcites [57]
- Not checked yetcites [58]
- Not checked yetcites [59]
- Not checked yetcites [60]
- Not checked yetcites [61]
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [63]
- Not checked yetcites [64]
- Not checked yetcites [65]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In general, these studies are of poor quality, lack standard definitions of breastfeeding or outcome measures, and have not included premature or ill infants (50,51).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50]
- Not checked yetcites [51]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CDC reviewed all available evidence and agreed that the data were not sufficiently conclusive to change current guidance.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Limited evidence demonstrated no substantial decrease in effectiveness of oral contraceptives among women who underwent a biliopancreatic diversion; however, evidence from pharmacokinetic studies suggested conflicting results regarding oral contraceptive effectiveness among women who underwent a jejunoileal bypass (74).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Some studies suggest that women using progestin-only injectable contraception might be at increased risk for HIV acquisition; other studies do not show this association.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [108]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although findings on the risk for venous thrombosis with use of POCs in otherwise healthy women is inconsistent, any small increased risk is substantially less than that with COCs (75-77).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [75]
- Not checked yetcites [76]
- Not checked yetcites [77]
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bariatric surgical procedures involving a malabsorptive component have the potential to decrease oral contraceptive effectiveness, perhaps further decreased by postoperative complications such as long-term diarrhea, vomiting, or both.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“another study found that etonogestrel levels were decreased and 5% of women had presumptive ovulation while using etonogestrel implants with EFV (140,141).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
- Not checked yetcites [141]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Three studies of women using LNG implants showed increased pregnancy rates for women using EFV-containing ARV therapy compared with no ARV use, although absolute pregnancy rates were still lower than for other hormonal methods in one study (141-143);”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
- Not checked yetcites [142]
- Not checked yetcites [143]
plaindirectn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women with sickle cell disease, POC use did not have adverse effects on hematologic parameters and, in some studies, was beneficial with respect to clinical symptoms (126-133).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > 1 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [126]
- Not checked yetcites [127]
- Not checked yetcites [128]
- Not checked yetcites [129]
- Not checked yetcites [130]
- Not checked yetcites [131]
- Not checked yetcites [132]
- Not checked yetcites [133]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“No significant effects were found on pregnancy rates, DMPA levels, EFV levels, or HIV disease progression in women using DMPA and EFV compared with DMPA alone (141,144-148).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
- Not checked yetcites [144]
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [146]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
- Not checked yetcites [148]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“One study found that women using etonogestrel implants with EFV had a higher pregnancy rate than women not using ARVs, although confidence intervals overlapped and absolute pregnancy rates were still lower than for other hormonal methods;”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [140]
- Not checked yetcites [141]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One study demonstrated no pregnancies, no ovulations, no change in LPV/r level, and no change in HIV disease progression in women using DMPA (153);”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although no data exist, POC users with adequately controlled and monitored hypertension should be at lower risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke than are untreated hypertensive POC users.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX C1.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Women adequately treated for hypertension are at lower risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke than are untreated women.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“One study found no pregnancies, no ovulations, no change in DMPA concentrations and no change in HIV disease progression with use of DMPA and NFV compared with DMPA alone;”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [145]
- Not checked yetcites [147]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“another study found a small increase in pregnancy rate in women using DMPA with LPV/r compared with no ARV therapy, however confidence intervals overlapped (141).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Drugs that are inhibitors of CYP3A4 or CYP2C9 theoretically have the potential to increase levels of contraceptive steroid, which might increase adverse events.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“CHCs protect against pregnancy in general, including ectopic gestation.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Condition Category CHCs Clarifications/Evidence/Comments
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The risk for future ectopic pregnancy is increased among women who have had an ectopic pregnancy in the past.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“BMD is a surrogate marker for fracture risk that might not be valid for premenopausal women and therefore might not accurately predict current or future (postmenopausal) fracture risk (84)(85)(86).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Age Evidence:
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [84]
- Not checked yetcites [85]
- Not checked yetcites [86]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bariatric surgical procedures involving a malabsorptive component have the potential to decrease oral contraceptive effectiveness, perhaps further decreased by postoperative complications, such as long-term diarrhea or vomiting.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > History of bariatric surgery
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among women with valvular heart disease, CHC use may further increase the risk for arterial thrombosis; women with complicated valvular heart disease are at greatest risk.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Valvular heart disease
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“COCs might increase fluid retention in healthy women; fluid retention may worsen heart failure in women with peripartum cardiomyopathy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“COCs might induce cardiac arrhythmias in healthy women; women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Changes in lipid profile and hemostatic markers were limited, and most changes remained within normal values (254-263).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [254]
- Not checked yetcites [255]
- Not checked yetcites [256]
- Not checked yetcites [257]
- Not checked yetcites [258]
- Not checked yetcites [259]
- Not checked yetcites [260]
- Not checked yetcites [261]
- Not checked yetcites [262]
- Not checked yetcites [263]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Women with endometriosis did not report worsening of the condition or any adverse events related to COC use (209).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Endometriosis 1
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [209]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Women with menorrhagia did not report worsening of the condition or any adverse events related to COC use (208).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [208]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“One older meta-analysis found that migraine without aura was associated with an increased risk for ischemic stroke, while two more recent meta-analyses did not find such an association (203-205).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Peripartum cardiomyopathy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [203]
- Not checked yetcites [204]
- Not checked yetcites [205]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Among women with insulin-dependent or non-insulin-dependent diabetes, COC use had limited effect on daily insulin requirements and no effect on long-term diabetes control (e.g., glycosylated hemoglobin levels) or progression to retinopathy.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [254]
- Not checked yetcites [255]
- Not checked yetcites [256]
- Not checked yetcites [257]
- Not checked yetcites [258]
- Not checked yetcites [259]
- Not checked yetcites [260]
- Not checked yetcites [261]
- Not checked yetcites [262]
- Not checked yetcites [263]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to CDC STD treatment guidelines, routine presumptive treatment of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomonas is recommended after sexual assault (3).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Data suggest that in women with chronic hepatitis, COC use does not increase the rate or severity of cirrhotic fibrosis, nor does it increase the risk for hepatocellular carcinoma.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Ovarian cancer
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [265]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The duration of ECP use is less than that of regular use of COCs or POPs and thus would be expected to have less clinical impact.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Appendix J Classifications for Emergency Contraception
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Breastfeeding is not recommended for 24 hours after taking UPA because it is excreted in breast milk, with highest concentrations in the first 24 hours, and maximum maternal serum levels are reached 1-3 hours after administration.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > BOX J1. Categories for classifying emergency contraception
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated decreased concentrations of ethinyl estradiol and progestin among women using COCs and NVP compared with COCs alone, and one study found no change in contraceptive hormone concentrations (278,284,285).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [278]
- Not checked yetcites [284]
- Not checked yetcites [285]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two studies suggested that pregnancy rates might be higher among women using COCs and EFV compared with COCs alone, although one study found no difference in pregnancy rates (275-277)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [275]
- Not checked yetcites [276]
- Not checked yetcites [277]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Symptoms-based and calendarbased methods do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Female and male sterilization do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hormonal contraceptives and intrauterine devices do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Repeated and high-dose use of the spermicide nonoxynol-9 was associated with increased risk for genital lesions, which might increase the risk for HIV infection (2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Use of spermicides or diaphragms (with spermicide) can disrupt the cervical mucosa, which might increase viral shedding and HIV transmission to noninfected sex partners.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Tubal sterilization for women and vasectomy for men are permanent, safe, and highly effective methods of contraception.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Endometrial cancer This condition is associated with increased risk for adverse health events as a result of pregnancy (Box 2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Two analyses suggest obese women might also experience an increased risk for pregnancy after use of UPA compared with nonobese women, although this increase was not significant in one study (4).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, FAB methods can be used without concern for health effects in persons who choose them.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, theoretical concerns extend to use of other CYP3A4 inducers as well as to COC and LNG ECPs, which have metabolic pathways similar to those of UPA.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No medical conditions worsen because of FAB methods.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The Bellagio Consensus provided the scientific basis for defining the conditions under which breastfeeding can be used safely and effectively for birth-spacing purposes; programmatic guidelines were developed at a meeting of family planning experts for its use as a method of family planning, and the method was then given the name the lactational amenorrhea method (1,2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Coitus interruptus does not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“All major medical organizations recommend exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months of life, with continuing breastfeeding through the first year and beyond for as long as mutually desired (3).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Coitus interruptus is unforgiving of incorrect use, and its effectiveness depends on the willingness and ability of the couple to use withdrawal with every act of intercourse.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These guidelines include the following three criteria, all of which must be met to ensure adequate protection from an unplanned pregnancy: 1) amenorrhea; 2) fully or nearly fully breastfeeding (no interval of >4-6 hours between breastfeeds); and 3) <6 months postpartum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
- Not checked yetcites [2]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“women using these methods should be counseled that consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, no medical conditions absolutely restrict a person's eligibility for sterilization (with the exception of known allergy or hypersensitivity to any materials used to complete the sterilization method).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Coitus interruptus prevents sperm from entering the woman's vagina, thereby preventing contact between spermatozoa and the ovum.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to labelling information, rifampin markedly decreases UPA levels by ≥90%, which might decrease its efficacy (2).”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Solid organ transplantation
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.
“For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, classifications are based on the assumption that women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.”
“For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, classifications are based on the assumption that women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Superficial venous thrombosis might be associated with an increased risk for VTE.
“CHCs: Superficial venous thrombosis might be associated with an increased risk for VTE.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Superficial venous thrombosis associated with a peripheral intravenous catheter is less likely to be associated with additional thrombosis.
“Superficial venous thrombosis associated with a peripheral intravenous catheter is less likely to be associated with additional thrombosis and use of CHCs may be considered.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Most women do not require additional STD screening at the time of IUD insertion.
“IUD initiation: Most women do not require additional STD screening at the time of IUD insertion.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Breastfeeding provides important health benefits for mother and infant.
“Breastfeeding provides important health benefits for mother and infant.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women using teratogenic drugs are at increased risk for poor pregnancy outcomes.
“women using teratogenic drugs are at increased risk for poor pregnancy outcomes”
The paper relies on this without support.
Hormonal contraceptives and IUDs are highly effective at preventing pregnancy.
“Although hormonal contraceptives and IUDs are highly effective at preventing pregnancy, they do not protect against STDs, including HIV.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Hormonal contraceptives and IUDs do not protect against STDs, including HIV.
“Although hormonal contraceptives and IUDs are highly effective at preventing pregnancy, they do not protect against STDs, including HIV.”
The paper relies on this without support.
IUDs do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV.
“IUDs do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and women using these methods should be counseled that consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.
“Clarification: Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.”
“Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.”
“Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Severe thrombocytopenia increases the risk for bleeding.
“Clarification: Severe thrombocytopenia increases the risk for bleeding.”
“Severe thrombocytopenia increases the risk for bleeding.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For cystic fibrosis, classifications are based on the assumption that no other conditions are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such conditions.
“For cystic fibrosis, classifications are based on the assumption that no other conditions are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such conditions.”
“For cystic fibrosis, classifications are based on the assumption that no other conditions are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such conditions.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all categories of hypertension, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease exist.
“For all categories of hypertension, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease exist.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all subconditions of SLE, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such risk factors.
“For all subconditions of SLE, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such risk factors.”
“For all subconditions of SLE, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present; these classifications must be modified in the presence of such risk factors.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all subconditions of SLE, no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present.
“For all subconditions of SLE, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors for cardiovascular disease are present”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For cystic fibrosis, no other conditions are present.
“For cystic fibrosis, classifications are based on the assumption that no other conditions are present”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all categories of hypertension, no other risk factors exist for cardiovascular disease.
“For all categories of hypertension, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors exist for cardiovascular disease.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all categories of hypertension, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors exist for cardiovascular disease.
“For all categories of hypertension, classifications are based on the assumption that no other risk factors exist for cardiovascular disease.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When multiple risk factors do exist, risk for cardiovascular disease might increase substantially.
“When multiple risk factors do exist, risk for cardiovascular disease might increase substantially.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A single reading of blood pressure level is not sufficient to classify a woman as hypertensive.
“A single reading of blood pressure level is not sufficient to classify a woman as hypertensive.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women adequately treated for hypertension are at lower risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke than are untreated women.
“Women adequately treated for hypertension are at lower risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke than are untreated women.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Irregular menstrual bleeding patterns are common among healthy women.
“Irregular menstrual bleeding patterns are common among healthy women.”
The paper relies on this without support.
POC use frequently induces an irregular bleeding pattern.
“POC use frequently induces an irregular bleeding pattern.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Implant use might induce irregular bleeding patterns, especially during the first 3-6 months, although these patterns might persist longer.
“Implant use might induce irregular bleeding patterns, especially during the first 3-6 months, although these patterns might persist longer.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Breast cancer is a hormonally sensitive tumor, and the prognosis for women with current or recent breast cancer might worsen with POC use.
“Breast cancer is a hormonally sensitive tumor, and the prognosis for women with current or recent breast cancer might worsen with POC use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
POCs do not appear to cause growth of uterine fibroids.
“POCs do not appear to cause growth of uterine fibroids.”
The paper relies on this without support.
POCs do not protect against HIV or lower genital tract STDs.
“they do not protect against HIV or lower genital tract STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Rifampin is likely to decrease the effectiveness of some POCs.
“Rifampin is likely to decrease the effectiveness of some POCs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some POCs might increase the risk for thrombosis, although this increase is substantially less than with COCs.
“Some POCs might increase the risk for thrombosis, although this increase is substantially less than with COCs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Absorption of POPs among women with IBD might be reduced if the woman has substantial malabsorption caused by severe disease or small bowel surgery.
“Absorption of POPs among women with IBD might be reduced if the woman has substantial malabsorption caused by severe disease or small bowel surgery.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women with IBD have a higher prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia than the general population.
“Women with IBD have a higher prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia than the general population.”
The paper relies on this without support.
COC use in healthy women is associated with development and growth of hepatocellular adenoma.
“COC use in healthy women is associated with development and growth of hepatocellular adenoma; whether other hormonal contraceptives have similar effects is not known.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women with cystic fibrosis have a higher prevalence of osteopenia, osteoporosis, and fragility fractures than the general population.
“Women with cystic fibrosis have a higher prevalence of osteopenia, osteoporosis, and fragility fractures than the general population.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Changes in the menstrual pattern associated with POC use have little effect on hemoglobin levels.
“Changes in the menstrual pattern associated with POC use have little effect on hemoglobin levels.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Progestin-only implants might induce cardiac arrhythmias in healthy women.
“Progestin-only implants might induce cardiac arrhythmias in healthy women”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.
“women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.”
“women with peripartum cardiomyopathy have a high incidence of cardiac arrhythmias.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, classifications are based on the assumption that women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.
“For all subconditions of gestational trophoblastic disease, classifications are based on the assumption that women are under close medical supervision because of the need for monitoring of β-hCG levels for appropriate disease surveillance.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The risk for future ectopic pregnancy is increased among women who have had an ectopic pregnancy in the past.
“The risk for future ectopic pregnancy is increased among women who have had an ectopic pregnancy in the past.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Persons with systemic lupus erythematosus are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism.
“Persons with SLE are at increased risk for ischemic heart disease, stroke, and VTE.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some conditions that increase the risk for deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism are heritable.
“Some conditions that increase the risk for DTV/PE are heritable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women adequately treated for hypertension are at reduced risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke compared with untreated women.
“Women adequately treated for hypertension are at reduced risk for acute myocardial infarction and stroke compared with untreated women.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fluvoxamine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor known to be a moderate inhibitor of both CYP3A4 and CYP2C9.
“Fluvoxamine is an SSRI known to be a moderate inhibitor of both 3A4 and 2C9; however, no clinical or pharmacokinetic studies were identified to explore potential drug-drug interactions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Among women with migraine, oral contraceptive use is associated with about a threefold increased risk for ischemic stroke compared with nonuse.
“Among women with migraine, oral contraceptive use is associated with about a threefold increased risk for ischemic stroke compared with nonuse, although most studies did not specify migraine type or oral contraceptive formulation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No conditions that cause vaginal bleeding will be worsened in the short-term by use of CHCs.
“No conditions that cause vaginal bleeding will be worsened in the short-term by use of CHCs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
COC use reduces the risk for endometrial cancer; whether patch or ring use reduces the risk for endometrial cancer is not known.
“COC use reduces the risk for endometrial cancer; whether patch or ring use reduces the risk for endometrial cancer is not known.”
The paper relies on this without support.
COC use reduces the risk for ovarian cancer; whether patch or ring use reduces the risk for ovarian cancer is not known.
“COC use reduces the risk for ovarian cancer; whether patch or ring use reduces the risk for ovarian cancer is not known.”
The paper relies on this without support.
COCs do not appear to cause growth of uterine fibroids, and patch and ring also are not expected to cause growth.
“COCs do not appear to cause growth of uterine fibroids, and patch and ring also are not expected to cause growth.”
The paper relies on this without support.
COCs might reduce the risk for PID among women with STDs but do not protect against HIV or lower genital tract STDs.
“COCs might reduce the risk for PID among women with STDs but do not protect against HIV or lower genital tract STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Overall, evidence does not support an association between COC use and progression of HIV.
“Overall, evidence does not support an association between COC use and progression of HIV.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Limited direct evidence does not support an association between COC use and transmission of HIV to noninfected partners; studies measuring genital viral shedding as a proxy for infectivity have had mixed results.
“Limited direct evidence does not support an association between COC use and transmission of HIV to noninfected partners; studies measuring genital viral shedding as a proxy for infectivity have had mixed results.”
The paper relies on this without support.
CHCs might cause a small increased risk for gallbladder disease.
“CHCs might cause a small increased risk for gallbladder disease.”
The paper relies on this without support.
CHCs might worsen existing gallbladder disease.
“CHCs might worsen existing gallbladder disease.”
The paper relies on this without support.
History of pregnancy-related cholestasis might predict an increased risk for COC-related cholestasis.
“History of pregnancy-related cholestasis might predict an increased risk for COC-related cholestasis.”
The paper relies on this without support.
History of COC-related cholestasis predicts an increased risk with subsequent COC use.
“History of COC-related cholestasis predicts an increased risk with subsequent COC use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Anecdotal evidence from countries where thalassemia is prevalent indicates that COC use does not worsen the condition.
“Anecdotal evidence from countries where thalassemia is prevalent indicates that COC use does not worsen the condition.”
The paper relies on this without support.
CHC use might decrease menstrual blood loss.
“CHC use might decrease menstrual blood loss.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Limited clinical and pharmacokinetic data do not demonstrate concern for SSRIs decreasing the effectiveness of oral contraceptives.
“Limited clinical and pharmacokinetic data do not demonstrate concern for SSRIs decreasing the effectiveness of oral contraceptives.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women with multiple sclerosis are at higher risk than unaffected women for VTE.
“However, women with multiple sclerosis are at higher risk than unaffected women for VTE.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women with breast cancer susceptibility genes (e.g., BRCA1 and BRCA2) have a higher baseline risk for breast cancer than women without these genes.
“Women with breast cancer susceptibility genes (e.g., BRCA1 and BRCA2) have a higher baseline risk for breast cancer than women without these genes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The baseline risk for breast cancer is also higher among women with a family history of breast cancer than among those who do not have such a history.
“The baseline risk for breast cancer is also higher among women with a family history of breast cancer than among those who do not have such a history.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Menstrual irregularities are common in postmenarche and perimenopause and might complicate the use of FAB methods.
“Menstrual irregularities are common in postmenarche and perimenopause and might complicate the use of FAB methods.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women who are primarily breastfeeding and are amenorrheic are unlikely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs and hormonal changes during the first 6 months postpartum.
“Women who are primarily breastfeeding and are amenorrheic are unlikely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs and hormonal changes during the first 6 months postpartum.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The likelihood of resumption of fertility increases with time postpartum and with substitution of breast milk by other foods.
“However, the likelihood of resumption of fertility increases with time postpartum and with substitution of breast milk by other foods.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Nonbreastfeeding women are not likely to have detectable fertility signs or hormonal changes before 4 weeks postpartum.
“Nonbreastfeeding women are not likely to have detectable fertility signs or hormonal changes before 4 weeks postpartum.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Ovulation before first menses is common in nonbreastfeeding postpartum women.
“Although the risk for pregnancy is low, ovulation before first menses is common; therefore, a method appropriate for the postpartum period should be offered.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Nonbreastfeeding women are likely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs, hormonal changes, or both at this time; likelihood increases rapidly with time postpartum.
“Nonbreastfeeding women are likely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs, hormonal changes, or both at this time; likelihood increases rapidly with time postpartum.”
The paper relies on this without support.
After abortion, women are likely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs, hormonal changes, or both; likelihood increases with time postabortion.
“After abortion, women are likely to have sufficient ovarian function to produce detectable fertility signs, hormonal changes, or both; likelihood increases with time postabortion.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Presence of irregular vaginal bleeding makes FAB methods unreliable.
“Presence of this condition makes FAB methods unreliable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Vaginal discharge makes recognition of cervical secretions difficult.
“Because vaginal discharge makes recognition of cervical secretions difficult, the condition should be evaluated and treated if needed before providing methods based on cervical secretions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Use of certain mood-altering drugs such as lithium, tricyclic antidepressants, and antianxiety therapies, as well as certain antibiotics and anti-inflammatory drugs, might alter cycle regularity or affect fertility signs.
“Use of certain mood-altering drugs such as lithium, tricyclic antidepressants, and antianxiety therapies, as well as certain antibiotics and anti-inflammatory drugs, might alter cycle regularity or affect fertility signs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Elevated temperatures might make basal body temperature difficult to interpret but have no effect on cervical secretions.
“Elevated temperatures might make basal body temperature difficult to interpret but have no effect on cervical secretions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Some chronic diseases interfere with cycle regularity, making calendar-based methods difficult to interpret.
“In addition, some chronic diseases interfere with cycle regularity, making calendar-based methods difficult to interpret.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Bariatric surgical procedures involving a malabsorptive component have the potential to decrease oral contraceptive effectiveness, perhaps further decreased by postoperative complications such as long-term diarrhea, vomiting, or both.
“Bariatric surgical procedures involving a malabsorptive component have the potential to decrease oral contraceptive effectiveness, perhaps further decreased by postoperative complications such as long-term diarrhea, vomiting, or both.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Cu-IUDs, UPA, LNG, and COCs do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).
“Cu-IUDs, UPA, LNG, and COCs do not protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and women using these methods should be counseled that consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs.
“consistent and correct use of the male latex condom reduces the risk for transmission of HIV and other STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Use of female condoms can provide protection from transmission of STDs, although data are limited.
“Use of female condoms can provide protection from transmission of STDs, although data are limited.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Frequently repeated ECP use might be harmful for women with conditions classified as 2, 3, or 4 for CHC or POC use.
“Frequently repeated ECP use might be harmful for women with conditions classified as 2, 3, or 4 for CHC or POC use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Women who have experienced sexual assault are at increased risk for STDs.
“Women who have experienced sexual assault are at increased risk for STDs.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No safety concerns exist for ECPs in obese women.
“Despite this, no safety concerns exist.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The risk for cardiovascular disease increases with age and might increase with CHC use.
“The risk for cardiovascular disease increases with age and might increase with CHC use.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Limited information is available about the safety of the combined hormonal patch and combined vaginal ring among women with specific medical conditions.
“Limited information is available about the safety of the combined hormonal patch and combined vaginal ring among women with specific medical conditions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Evidence indicates that the combined hormonal patch and the combined vaginal ring provide comparable safety and pharmacokinetic profiles to COCs with similar hormone formulations.
“Evidence indicates that the combined hormonal patch and the combined vaginal ring provide comparable safety and pharmacokinetic profiles to COCs with similar hormone formulations .”
The paper relies on this without support.
Risk for cervical cap failure is higher in parous women than in nulliparous women.
“Risk for cervical cap failure is higher in parous women than in nulliparous women.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Severe obesity might make diaphragm and cap placement difficult.
“Severe obesity might make diaphragm and cap placement difficult.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Repeated and high-dose use of the spermicide nonoxynol-9 can cause vaginal and cervical irritation or abrasions.
“Repeated and high-dose use of the spermicide nonoxynol-9 can cause vaginal and cervical irritation or abrasions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In the United States, replacement feeding is affordable, feasible, acceptable, sustainable, and safe.
“Therefore, in the United States, where replacement feeding is affordable, feasible, acceptable, sustainable, and safe, breastfeeding for women with HIV is not recommended (3,4).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fertility awareness-based methods have relatively higher typical-use failure rates.
“Women with conditions that make pregnancy an unacceptable risk should be advised that FAB methods might not be appropriate for them because of the relatively higher typical-use failure rates of these methods.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The lactational amenorrhea method has relatively higher typical-use failure rates.
“Women with conditions that make pregnancy an unacceptable risk should be advised that the lactational amenorrhea method might not be appropriate for them because of its relatively higher typical-use failure rates.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Coitus interruptus has relatively higher typical-use failure rates.
“Women with conditions that make pregnancy an unacceptable risk should be advised that coitus interruptus might not be appropriate for them because of its relatively higher typical-use failure rates.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In 2016, the Center for Disease Control issued the U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, in which CHC use with any hereditary thrombophilia was considered to be associated with unacceptable health risk (Category 4)[112].”
From Estrogen and thrombosis: a bench to bedside review (2020) · cites this paper as [112]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
“b.Second trimester 1 1 1 Clarification: Diaphragm and cap are unsuitable until 6 weeks after second trimester abortion.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Using the Categories in Practice
“1 = A condition for which there is no restriction for the use of the contraceptive method.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Additional information
“Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 1 1 1 Clarification: The cap should not be used.Diaphragm use has no restrictions.”
§ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > Using the Categories in Practice
“1 = A condition for which there is no restriction for the use of the contraceptive method.”
Citations
Cites
2 retracted
Elsedeek, M. S.-E.-A. (2011) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.07.036 · Cited by 23
RetractedElsedeek, M. S.-E.-A. (2015) · International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.02.031 · Cited by 9
RetractedYaşlı Kadınlarda Üreme Sağlığı
Kokanalı, D., & Engin Üstün, Y. (n.d.) · DergiPark (Istanbul University) · Cited by 170,090
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2010) · International Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007 · Cited by 12,156
Correspondence - Tranexamic acid for traumatic brain injury
(2005) · London School of Economics and Political Science Theses Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736 · Cited by 11,894
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 · Cited by 10,578
Breastfeeding and the use of human milk
BREASTFEEDING, S. O., Eidelman, A. I., Schanler, R. J., Johnston, M., Landers, S., Noble, L., Szucs, K., & Viehmann, L. (2012) · Pediatrics · doi:10.1542/peds.2011-3552 · Cited by 4,357
Prevention of Infective Endocarditis
Wilson, W. R., Taubert, K. A., Gewitz, M. H., Lockhart, P. B., Baddour, L. M., Levison, M. E., Bolger, A. F., Cabell, C. H., Takahashi, M., Baltimore, R. S., et al. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.183095 · Cited by 2,807
Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines (2015)
Workowski, K., & BOLAN, G. A. (2015) · The Scientific Issues of Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University Series pedagogy · doi:10.18370/2309-4117.2015.24.51-56 · Cited by 2,684
Declines in Unintended Pregnancy in the United States, 2008–2011
Finer, L. B., & Zolna, M. R. (2016) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa1506575 · Cited by 1,989
Research works printed but not linked: 63
- El-Shafei MM, Mashali A, Hassan EO, El-Boghdad L, El-Lakkany N. Postpartum and postabortion intrauterine device insertion unmet needs of safe reproductive health: three years experience of Mansoura University Hospital. J Egypt Soc Obstet Gynecol 2000;26:253-62.
- Puzey M. Mirena at caesarean section. Eur J Contracep Reprod 2005;10:164-7.
- Braniff K, Gomez E, Muller R. A randomised clinical trial to assess satisfaction with the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system inserted at caesarean section compared to postpartum placement. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2015;55:279-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12335 · DOI
- Rogovskaya S, Rivera R, Grimes DA, et al. Effect of a levonorgestrel intrauterine system on women with type 1 diabetes: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:811-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01. AOG.0000156301.11939.56 140 · DOI
- Phillips SJ, Tepper NK, Kapp N, Nanda K, Temmerman M, Curtis KM. Progestogen-only contraceptive use among breastfeeding women: a systematic review. Contraception 2015;S0010-7824(15)00585-5.
- World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease and Steroid Hormone Contraception. Cardiovascular disease and use of oral and injectable progestogen-only contraceptives and combined injectable contraceptives. Results of an international, multicenter, case-control study. Contraception 1998;57:315-24 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-7824(98)00041-9 · DOI
- Heinemann LA, Assmann A, DoMinh T, Garbe E. Oral progestogen- only contraceptives and cardiovascular risk: results from the Transnational Study on Oral Contraceptives and the Health of Young Women. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 1999;4:67-73. http://dx.doi. org/10.3109/13625189909064007 · DOI
- Vasilakis C, Jick H, del Mar Melero-Montes M. Risk of idiopathic venous thromboembolism in users of progestagens alone. Lancet 1999;354:1610-1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04394-9 · DOI
- Tepper NK, Paulen ME, Marchbanks PA, Curtis KM. Safety of contraceptive use among women with peripartum cardiomyopathy: a systematic review. Contraception 2010;82:95-101. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.contraception.2010.02.004 · DOI
- Bernatsky S, Clarke A, Ramsey-Goldman R, et al. Hormonal exposures and breast cancer in a sample of women with systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1178-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ rheumatology/keh282 · DOI
- Bernatsky S, Ramsey-Goldman R, Gordon C, et al. Factors associated with abnormal Pap results in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1386-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ rheumatology/keh331 · DOI
- Chopra N, Koren S, Greer WL, et al. Factor V Leiden, prothrombin gene mutation, and thrombosis risk in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies. J Rheumatol 2002;29:1683-8.
- Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Grodzicky T, et al. Traditional Framingham risk factors fail to fully account for accelerated atherosclerosis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:2331-7. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/1529-0131(200110)44:10<2331::AID-ART395≥3.0.CO;2-I 85. Julkunen HA. Oral contraceptives in systemic lupus erythematosus: side-effects and influence on the activity of SLE. Scand J Rheumatol 1991;20:427-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03009749109096822 · DOI
- Jungers P, Dougados M, Pélissier C, et al. Influence of oral contraceptive therapy on the activity of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1982;25:618-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.1780250603 · DOI
- Manzi S, Meilahn EN, Rairie JE, et al. Age-specific incidence rates of myocardial infarction and angina in women with systemic lupus erythematosus: comparison with the Framingham Study. Am J Epidemiol 1997;145:408-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009122 · DOI
- McAlindon T, Giannotta L, Taub N, D'Cruz D, Hughes G. Environmental factors predicting nephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 1993;52:720-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ard.52.10.720 · DOI
- McDonald J, Stewart J, Urowitz MB, Gladman DD. Peripheral vascular disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 1992;51:56-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ard.51.1.56 · DOI
- Mintz G, Gutiérrez G, Delezé M, Rodríguez E. Contraception with progestagens in systemic lupus erythematosus. Contraception 1984;30:29-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-7824(84)90076-3 · DOI
- Petri M. Musculoskeletal complications of systemic lupus erythematosus in the Hopkins Lupus Cohort: an update. Arthritis Care Res 1995;8:137-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.1790080305 · DOI
- Petri M. Lupus in Baltimore: evidence-based 'clinical pearls' from the Hopkins Lupus Cohort. Lupus 2005;14:970-3. http://dx.doi. org/10.1191/0961203305lu2230xx · DOI
- Petri M, Kim MY, Kalunian KC, et al; OC-SELENA Trial. Combined oral contraceptives in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2550-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa051135 · DOI
- Sánchez-Guerrero J, Uribe AG, Jiménez-Santana L, et al. A trial of contraceptive methods in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2539-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa050817 · DOI
- Sarabi ZS, Chang E, Bobba R, et al. Incidence rates of arterial and venous thrombosis after diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2005;53:609-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.21314 · DOI
- Schaedel ZE, Dolan G, Powell MC. The use of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system in the management of menorrhagia in women with hemostatic disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:1361-3. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.05.002 · DOI
- Somers E, Magder LS, Petri M. Antiphospholipid antibodies and incidence of venous thrombosis in a cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 2002;29:2531-6.
- Urowitz MB, Bookman AA, Koehler BE, Gordon DA, Smythe HA, Ogryzlo MA. The bimodal mortality pattern of systemic lupus erythematosus. Am J Med 1976;60:221-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(76)90431-9 100. · DOI
- Choojitarom K, Verasertniyom O, Totemchokchyakarn K, Nantiruj K, Sumethkul V, Janwityanujit S. Lupus nephritis and Raynaud's phenomenon are significant risk factors for vascular thrombosis in SLE patients with positive antiphospholipid antibodies. Clin Rheumatol 2008;27:345-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0721-z 101. · DOI
- Wahl DG, Guillemin F, de Maistre E, Perret C, Lecompte T, Thibaut G. Risk for venous thrombosis related to antiphospholipid antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus-a meta-analysis. Lupus 1997;6:467- 73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096120339700600510 102. · DOI
- Tepper NK, Whiteman MK, Zapata LB, Marchbanks PA, Curtis KM. Safety of hormonal contraceptives among women with migraine: a systematic review. Contraception 2016. Epub May 3, 2016. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2016.04.016 104. · DOI
- Radowicki S, Skórzewska K, Szlendak K. Safety evaluation of a transdermal contraceptive system with an oral contraceptive [Polish]. Ginekol Pol 2005;76:884-9.
- Meier C, Brauchli YB, Jick SS, Kraenzlin ME, Meier CR. Use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and fracture risk. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010;95:4909-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1210/jc.2010-0032 · DOI · Paper page
- Beksinska ME, Kleinschmidt I, Smit JA, Farley TM. Bone mineral density in a cohort of adolescents during use of norethisterone enanthate, depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate or combined oral contraceptives and after discontinuation of norethisterone enanthate. Contraception 2009;79:345-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2008.11.009 · DOI
- Cromer BA, Bonny AE, Stager M, et al. Bone mineral density in adolescent females using injectable or oral contraceptives: a 24-month prospective study. Fertil Steril 2008;90:2060-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.070 · DOI
- Berenson AB, Rahman M, Breitkopf CR, Bi LX. Effects of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and 20-µg oral contraceptives on bone mineral density. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:788-99. http://dx.doi. org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181875b78 · DOI
- Harel Z, Riggs S, Vaz R, Flanagan P, Harel D, Machan JT. Bone accretion in adolescents using the combined estrogen and progestin transdermal contraceptive method Ortho Evra: a pilot study. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2010;23:23-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2009.04.008 · DOI
- Beksinska ME, Kleinschmidt I, Smit JA, Farley TM. Bone mineral density in adolescents using norethisterone enanthate, depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate or combined oral contraceptives for contraception. Contraception 2007;75:438-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2007.02.001 · DOI
- Lara-Torre E, Edwards CP, Perlman S, Hertweck SP. Bone mineral density in adolescent females using depot medroxyprogesterone acetate. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2004;17:17-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2003.11.017 · DOI · Paper page
- Cromer BA, Blair JM, Mahan JD, Zibners L, Naumovski Z. A prospective comparison of bone density in adolescent girls receiving depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (Depo-Provera), levonorgestrel (Norplant), or oral contraceptives. J Pediatr 1996;129:671-6. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(96)70148-8 · DOI · Paper page
- Smallwood GH, Meador ML, Lenihan JP, Shangold GA, Fisher AC, Creasy GW; ORTHO EVRA/EVRA 002 Study Group. Efficacy and safety of a transdermal contraceptive system. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:799-805.
- Berenson AB, Breitkopf CR, Grady JJ, Rickert VI, Thomas A. Effects of hormonal contraception on bone mineral density after 24 months of use. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:899-906. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01. AOG.0000117082.49490.d5 · DOI
- Trussell J, Schwarz EB, Guthrie K. Obesity and oral contraceptive pill failure. Contraception 2009;79:334-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. contraception.2008.11.017 124. Vessey M. Oral contraceptive failures and body weight: findings in a large cohort study. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2001;27:90-1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1783/147118901101195092 125. · DOI
- Zieman M, Guillebaud J, Weisberg E, Shangold GA, Fisher AC, Creasy GW. Contraceptive efficacy and cycle control with the Ortho Evra/Evra transdermal system: the analysis of pooled data. Fertil Steril 2002;77(Suppl 2):S13-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)03275-7 127. · DOI
- Bernatsky S, Ramsey-Goldman R, Gordon C, et al. Factors associated with abnormal Pap results in systemic lupus erythematosus. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004;43:1386-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ rheumatology/keh331 181. · DOI
- Chopra N, Koren S, Greer WL, et al. Factor V Leiden, prothrombin gene mutation, and thrombosis risk in patients with antiphospholipid antibodies. J Rheumatol 2002;29:1683-8. 182. Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Grodzicky T, et al. Traditional Framingham risk factors fail to fully account for accelerated atherosclerosis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:2331-7. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/1529-0131(200110)44:10<2331::AID-ART395≥3.0.CO;2-I 183. Julkunen HA. Oral contraceptives in systemic lupus erythematosus: side-effects and influence on the activity of SLE. Scand J Rheumatol 1991;20:427-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03009749109096822 184. · DOI
- Julkunen HA, Kaaja R, Friman C. Contraceptive practice in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. Br J Rheumatol 1993;32:227-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/32.3.227 185. · DOI
- Jungers P, Dougados M, Pélissier C, et al. Influence of oral contraceptive therapy on the activity of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1982;25:618-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.1780250603 186. Manzi S, Meilahn EN, Rairie JE, et al. Age-specific incidence rates of myocardial infarction and angina in women with systemic lupus erythematosus: comparison with the Framingham Study. Am J Epidemiol 1997;145:408-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009122 187. · DOI
- McAlindon T, Giannotta L, Taub N, D'Cruz D, Hughes G. Environmental factors predicting nephritis in systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 1993;52:720-4. http://dx.doi. org/10.1136/ard.52.10.720 188. · DOI
- McDonald J, Stewart J, Urowitz MB, Gladman DD. Peripheral vascular disease in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Ann Rheum Dis 1992;51:56-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ard.51.1.56 189. Mintz G, Gutiérrez G, Delezé M, Rodríguez E. Contraception with progestagens in systemic lupus erythematosus. Contraception 1984;30:29-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-7824(84)90076-3 190. Petri M. Musculoskeletal complications of systemic lupus erythematosus in the Hopkins Lupus Cohort: an update. Arthritis Care Res 1995;8:137-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.1790080305 191. Petri M. Lupus in Baltimore: evidence-based 'clinical pearls' from the Hopkins Lupus Cohort. Lupus 2005;14:970-3. http://dx.doi. org/10.1191/0961203305lu2230xx 192. · DOI
- Petri M, Kim MY, Kalunian KC, et al; OC-SELENA Trial. Combined oral contraceptives in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2550-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa051135 193. · DOI
- Sánchez-Guerrero J, Uribe AG, Jiménez-Santana L, et al. A trial of contraceptive methods in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2539-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa050817 194. · DOI
- Sarabi ZS, Chang E, Bobba R, et al. Incidence rates of arterial and venous thrombosis after diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2005;53:609-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.21314 195. · DOI
- Schaedel ZE, Dolan G, Powell MC. The use of the levonorgestrel- releasing intrauterine system in the management of menorrhagia in women with hemostatic disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:1361-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.05.002 196. · DOI
- Somers E, Magder LS, Petri M. Antiphospholipid antibodies and incidence of venous thrombosis in a cohort of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 2002;29:2531-6. 197. Urowitz MB, Bookman AA, Koehler BE, Gordon DA, Smythe HA, Ogryzlo MA. The bimodal mortality pattern of systemic lupus erythematosus. Am J Med 1976;60:221-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(76)90431-9 198. · DOI
- Choojitarom K, Verasertniyom O, Totemchokchyakarn K, Nantiruj K, Sumethkul V, Janwityanujit S. Lupus nephritis and Raynaud's phenomenon are significant risk factors for vascular thrombosis in SLE patients with positive antiphospholipid antibodies. Clin Rheumatol 2008;27:345-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10067-007-0721-z 199. · DOI
- Wahl DG, Guillemin F, de Maistre E, Perret C, Lecompte T, Thibaut G. Risk for venous thrombosis related to antiphospholipid antibodies in systemic lupus erythematosus-a meta-analysis. Lupus 1997;6:467- 73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096120339700600510 200. · DOI
- Farr SL, Folger SG, Paulen ME, Curtis KM. Safety of contraceptive methods for women with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. Contraception 2010;82:64-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2010.02.003 201. · DOI
- Grigoryan OR, Grodnitskaya EE, Andreeva EN, Shestakova MV, Melnichenko GA, Dedov II. Contraception in perimenopausal women with diabetes mellitus. Gynecol Endocrinol 2006;22:198-206. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/09513590600624317 258. · DOI
- Skouby SO, Mølsted-Pedersen L, Kühl C, Bennet P. Oral contraceptives in diabetic women: metabolic effects of four compounds with different estrogen/progestogen profiles. Fertil Steril 1986;46:858-64 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)49825-0. 264. Zapata LB, Paulen ME, Cansino C, Marchbanks PA, Curtis KM. Contraceptive use among women with inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review. Contraception 2010;82:72-85. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.contraception.2010.02.012 265. · DOI
- Kapp N, Tilley IB, Curtis KM. The effects of hormonal contraceptive use among women with viral hepatitis or cirrhosis of the liver: a systematic review. Contraception 2009;80:381-6. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.04.007 266. Kapp N, Curtis KM. Hormonal contraceptive use among women with liver tumors: a systematic review. Contraception 2009;80:387-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.01.021 267. · DOI
- Todd CS, Deese J, Wang M, et al; FEM-PrEP Study Group. Sino-implant (II)® continuation and effect of concomitant tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine use on plasma levonorgestrel concentrations among women in Bondo, Kenya. Contraception 2015;91:248-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2014.10.008 272. Murnane PM, Heffron R, Ronald A, et al; Partners PrEP Study Team. Pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV-1 prevention does not diminish the pregnancy prevention effectiveness of hormonal contraception. AIDS 2014;28:1825-30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000000290 273. · DOI
- Kasonde M, Niska RW, Rose C, et al. Bone mineral density changes among HIV-uninfected young adults in a randomised trial of pre- exposure prophylaxis with tenofovir-emtricitabine or placebo in Botswana. PLoS One 2014;9:e90111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0090111 274. · DOI
- Pyra M, Heffron R, Mugo NR, et al; Partners in Prevention HSV/HIV Transmission Study and Partners PrEP Study Teams. Effectiveness of hormonal contraception in HIV-infected women using antiretroviral therapy. AIDS 2015;29:2353-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/QAD.0000000000000827 277. · DOI
- Myer L, Carter RJ, Katyal M, Toro P, El-Sadr WM, Abrams EJ. Impact of antiretroviral therapy on incidence of pregnancy among HIV-infected women in Sub-Saharan Africa: a cohort study. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000229 283. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021
Workowski, K. A., Bachmann, L. H., Chan, P. A., Johnston, C. M., Muzny, C. A., Park, I., Reno, H., Zenilman, J. M., & Bolan, G. A. (2021) · MMWR. Recommendations and Reports · doi:10.15585/mmwr.rr7004a1 · Cited by 3,018
Legro, R. S., Arslanian, S. A., Ehrmann, D. A., Hoeger, K. M., Murad, M. H., Pasquali, R., & Welt, C. K. (2013) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2013-2350 · Cited by 1,919
Azziz, R., Carmina, E., Chen, Z., Dunaif, A., Laven, J. S. E., Legro, R. S., Lizneva, D., Natterson-Horowtiz, B., Teede, H. J., & Yildiz, B. O. (2016) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.57 · Cited by 2,005
Sammaritano, L. R., Bermas, B. L., Chakravarty, E. F., Chambers, C., Clowse, M. E. B., Lockshin, M. D., Marder, W., Guyatt, G. H., Branch, D. W., Buyon, J. P., et al. (2020) · Arthritis & Rheumatology · doi:10.1002/art.41191 · Cited by 835
U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2016
Curtis, K. M., Jatlaoui, T. C., Tepper, N. K., Zapata, L. B., Horton, L. G., Jamieson, D. J., & Whiteman, M. K. (2016) · MMWR Recommendations and Reports · doi:10.15585/mmwr.rr6504a1 · Cited by 766
“Unintended pregnancy rates remain high in the United States; approximately 45% of all pregnancies are unintended, with higher proportions among adolescent and young women, women who are racial/ethnic minorities, and women with lower levels of education and income (1).”
BackgroundSelf-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Curtis, K. M., Tepper, N. K., Jatlaoui, T. C., Berry-Bibee, E., Horton, L. G., Zapata, L. B., Simmons, K. B., Pagano, H. P., Jamieson, D. J., & Whiteman, M. K.
- Affiliations
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
- Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
- Corresponding author
- Curtis, Kathryn M.
- ORCID
- Venue
- MMWR. Recommendations and Reports
- Published
- 2016-07-29
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1-103
- ISSN
- 1057-5987 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-8601
- OpenAlex
- W2089971796
- Cited by
- 1,456
- References
- 521
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 126 · 2022: 132 · 2021: 143 · 2020: 160 · 2019: 159 · 2018: 131 · 2017: 113 · 2016: 79
- FWCI
- 159.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- public-domain
- Locations
- MMWR Recommendations and Reports (publishedVersion, public-domain)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Male Reproductive Health Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
- Keywords
- contraceptive use, medical eligibility criteria, contraceptive choice, family planning, emergency contraception, ulipristal acetate, cystic fibrosis, multiple sclerosis, psychotropic drugs, Hypericum perforatum, postpartum contraception, breastfeeding, dyslipidemia, migraine, superficial venous disease, gestational trophoblastic disease, sexually transmitted infections, HIV, antiretroviral therapy, contraceptive counseling
- MeSH terms
- Contraindications, Contraception, Contraceptive Agents, Eligibility Determination, Family Planning Services, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Male, Pregnancy, United States, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Risk Assessment, Pregnancy, Unplanned
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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