Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36958823›Full record

ArticleBMJ sexual & reproductive health2023

Contraceptive use and pregnancy planning in Britain during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from a large, quasi-representative survey (Natsal-COVID).

Andrew J Baxter, Rebecca S Geary, Emily Dema, Raquel Bosó Pérez, Julie Riddell, Malachi Willis, Anne Conolly, Laura L Oakley, Andrew J Copas, Jo Gibbs and 6 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ sexual & reproductive health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew J BaxterMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK Andy.Baxter@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-7654-9687
Rebecca S GearyInstitute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1417-1057
Emily DemaInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7254-2023
Raquel Bosó PérezMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7342-4566
Julie RiddellMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8084-4566
Malachi WillisMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3173-3990
Anne ConollyInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4953-2182
Laura L OakleyCentre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4697-4316
Andrew J CopasInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8968-5963
Jo GibbsInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5696-0260
Christopher BonellLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6253-6498
Pam SonnenbergInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1067-1583
Catherine H MercerInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4220-5034
Soazig CliftonInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4171-0805
Nigel FieldInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2825-6652
Kirsten MitchellMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, School of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4409-6601
University College London · GBMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit · GBNatCen Social Research · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBNorwegian Institute of Public Health · NOUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU18Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/2Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/3Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContraceptive services were significantly disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic in Britain. We investigated contraception-related health inequalities in the first year of the pandemic.

methodsNatsal-COVID Wave 2 surveyed 6658 adults aged 18-59 years between March and April 2021, using quotas and weighting to achieve quasi-representativeness. Our analysis included sexually active participants aged 18-44 years, described as female at birth. We analysed contraception use, contraceptive switching due to the pandemic, contraceptive service access, and pregnancy plannedness.

resultsOf 1488 participants, 1619 were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, of whom 54.1% (51.0%-57.1%) reported routinely using effective contraception in the past year. Among all participants, 14.3% (12.5%-16.3%) reported switching or stopping contraception due to the pandemic. 3.2% (2.0%-5.1%) of those using effective methods pre-pandemic switched to less effective methods, while 3.8% (2.5%-5.9%) stopped. 29.3% (26.9%-31.8%) of at-risk participants reported seeking contraceptive services, of whom 16.4% (13.0%-20.4%) reported difficulty accessing services. Clinic closures and cancelled appointments were commonly reported pandemic-related reasons for difficulty accessing services. This unmet need was associated with younger age, diverse sexual identities and anxiety symptoms. Of 199 pregnancies, 6.6% (3.9%-11.1%) scored as 'unplanned'; less planning was associated with younger age, lower social grade and unemployment.

conclusionsJust under a third of participants sought contraceptive services during the pandemic and most were successful, indicating resilience and adaptability of service delivery. However, one in six reported an unmet need due to the pandemic. COVID-induced inequalities in service access potentially exacerbated existing reproductive health inequalities. These should be addressed in the post-pandemic period and beyond.

Indexed as

Contraceptive AgentsCOVID-19AdultContraceptionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPandemicsPregnancyUnited KingdomContraceptive AgentsCOVID-19family planning servicesreproductive healthsexual health

Identifiers

PMID36958823
PMCPMC10579517
OpenAlexW4360609849

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.