ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Hormonal contraception and mental health: a narrative review of screening, monitoring, and patient-centered care for family physicians.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hormonal contraceptives are widely used worldwide, yet the relationship between contraceptive use and mental health outcomes remains an area of active clinical inquiry, with mixed evidence regarding potential risks and benefits. Family physicians require clear guidance on screening, monitoring, and counseling. Objective: To provide a narrative review of current evidence on the association between hormonal contraceptive use and mental health outcomes, and to offer practical, expert-informed recommendations for family physicians. Methods: We conducted a narrative review of literature published between 2000 and 2025 in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, examining studies on hormonal contraceptive methods and mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, and mood disorders) in women of reproductive age. A narrative design was selected because of marked heterogeneity in study designs, formulations, populations, and outcome measures. Methodological quality was self-assessed using the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA), and the strength of the evidence underlying each conclusion is indicated throughout. Results: Evidence on hormonal contraception and mental health was mixed. Some studies reported associations with increased depression and anxiety; others reported neutral or even protective associations. Individual variability was notable, influenced by age, pre-existing psychiatric history, and formulation. Progestin-only methods and initiation during adolescence were more consistently associated with higher mood-related risks, whereas certain combined oral contraceptives, particularly those with anti-androgenic progestins, were associated with better outcomes or mood stabilization. Because most evidence is observational, these associations cannot establish causation and are susceptible to confounding by indication, reverse causation, and selection effects including the healthy-user phenomenon. Conclusion: Given this variability, clinicians should prioritize individualized risk assessment, informed counseling, and close monitoring. Tailoring contraceptive choices to each woman's mental health history is likely to support both reproductive autonomy and emotional well-being. The screening, risk-stratification, and monitoring approaches proposed here represent expert-informed clinical guidance rather than formal practice standards, and their feasibility will vary across primary care settings. Future research should focus on longitudinal designs, standardized outcomes, and diverse populations.
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.