ReviewComplex psychiatry
Oral Contraceptives and the Risk of Psychiatric Side Effects: A Review.
Review in Complex psychiatry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of oral contraceptive use in associations of concussion history with kynurenine pathway metabolites, inflammation, and psychological symptoms in female athletes.Brain, behavior, & immunity - health · 2026Article
- Comparison of Dermatologic and Neuropsychological Side Effects of Oral Contraceptives, 2016-2020.Open access journal of contraception · 2026Article
- GnRH analogs as a monotherapy in transgender and gender-diverse adolescents: clinical insights from a single-center study.Endocrine connections · 2025Article
- Hormonal Contraceptive Use and Affective Disorders: An Updated Review.Open access journal of contraception · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Oral contraceptives (OCs) are an essential medicine used by millions of people every day. Given the widespread usage of these medicines, even a small increase in psychiatric risk could be of clinical significance. Although mood-related side effects are a common reason for OC hesitancy and discontinuation, studies investigating psychiatric responses to OC treatment have had inconsistent results. Summary: While OCs are beneficial for most users, there is evidence that a subgroup of users is susceptible to mood side effects. Randomized controlled trials have generally failed to find differences in mood symptoms between OC and placebo users, but observational studies comparing OC users to non-users have reported increases in symptoms of depression, anxiety, and eating disorders. Additionally, observational evidence suggests that OC users may be more likely to use prescription psychotropic medications and to attempt or die by suicide. However, responses to OC treatment are highly heterogeneous, and some users report mood improvement. A variety of factors may increase the likelihood of negative psychiatric side effects, including younger age, previous experience of side effects from OCs, and preexisting psychiatric disorders. Progestin-only pills may confer a higher psychiatric risk than combination pills. Key Messages: Further research investigating factors that contribute to susceptibility to the mood-related side effects of OCs is clearly warranted. Genomic approaches may provide insight as to why some users experience side effects while others do not. Research elucidating who is most at risk and why will be essential to addressing prevalent concerns about the psychiatric risk of OCs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.