Transdermal contraception methods: today’s patches and new options on the horizon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The first contraceptive patch with ethinyl estradiol (EE) and norelgestromin in the United States demonstrated that there was a tremendous interest in topical methods, which could provide patient convenience, steady-state hormonal levels and reassurance of ongoing coverage, while maintaining efficacy and good bleeding patterns. Unfortunately, concerns about increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk diminished its popularity. Another version in Europe and Canada had slightly lower estrogen doses, but questions were raised about its VTE risk too based on its progestin. To fill that gap, two new contraceptive patches with lower estrogen levels have been developed and extensively tested. AREAS COVERED: This article provides a short overview of the first set of patches followed by discussions of the pharmacokinetics of the two experimental patches as well as the results of their clinical trials, including information about efficacy, bleeding patterns and tolerability. EXPERT OPINION: Given the recent increased use of first tier contraceptive methods (Intrauterine devices and implants), there may be interest in new patches. Price will influence their popularity. However, a new nondaily delivery system with lower estrogen levels will provide an important option to women.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".