Current Medical Research

Richard J. Fehring
In: The Linacre Quarterly · 2013 · vol. 80(2) , pp. 167–184 · doi:10.1179/0024363913z.00000000024 · PMID:24846448 · PMC6027000 · W1576707482
article OA: closed CC0
📄 Open PDF View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

Researchers assessed contraceptive knowledge among women in Saint Louis and found that most participants incorrectly estimated the effectiveness rates for various contraceptive methods, particularly overestimating the efficacy of condoms and natural family planning.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Central among the many issues that form a person’s choice in family planning is the method effectiveness rate for pregnancy avoidance (typically, most people do not consider the difference between moral and immoral methods). Despite the fact that couples who have just reasons to avoid pregnancy want a secure method of family planning, they often base their decisions on false perceptions of efficacy per method. Due to this tendency, researchers at Washington University conducted a study to determine the knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness among a cohort of women from Saint Louis (Eisenberg et al. 2012). The women were enrolled in a project called Contraceptive CHOICE. The project had a larger, more global purpose— to promote the use of long acting reversible contraceptives (LARC), e.g., hormonal implants and intrauterine devices. Once in place in the woman’s body, these contraceptive methods involve little behavioral action. They also have very high “perfect use” and “typical use” effectiveness rates. The researchers enrolled a convenience sample of 5,090 women between the ages of 14–45 years who were willing to start a new reversible contraceptive method. Of these women, 4,144 (81%) completed a baseline contraceptive knowledge effectiveness questionnaire. The main question asked on contraceptive efficacy was: “What percentage (or number of women out of 100) do you think would get pregnant in a year using each method listed below?” The available response categories were 10 percent. The answers were judged based on the contraceptive effectiveness results determined by James Trussell (Princeton University) and widely published in journals and books on contraception (Trussell 2011). The researchers found that the perceived contraceptive effectiveness of sterilization, the intrauterine device, and contraceptive implants were incorrect among 76, 65, and 55 percent of respondents, respectively. Most participants overestimated the effectiveness for condoms, the hormonal birth control pill, and natural family planning (NFP). Only 50 percent identified the correct typical effectiveness rate of NFP and only 33 percent identified the effectiveness rate of condoms. The author recognized the * Current Medical Research, NFPP/US Conference of Catholic Bishops, Washington, DC, 23. Nos. 3 & 4 (2012): 1–21. Used with permission. Note that the “Current Medical Research” feature focuses on issues relevant to natural family planning and the beginning of life. This piece is complemented by medical reviews published in The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, which focus more on other areas of general medical interest including end-of-life issues.— Ed. The Linacre Quarterly 80 (2) 2013, 167–184

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood

Papers in the corpus that this work cites (lower rings, blue) and that cite this one (upper rings, green). Dot size scales with the paper's in-corpus citation count — bigger dot = more influential within the endo/adeno field. Click a dot to open that paper. [ expand to 2 hops ] — adds papers reached through this work's immediate citers/citees. Heavier; up to 60 extra dots.

References (75)

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-06-12T06:13:51.797165+00:00
openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK