Mood and sexual side effects of hormonal contraception: physicians' and residents' knowledge, attitudes, and practices.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to sexual and mood side effects of hormonal contraceptives, and to compare residents with practising doctors. DESIGN: A mixed-method study with faxed or e-mailed surveys and semistructured telephone interviews. SETTING: British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of family doctors, all gynecologists, and all residents in family medicine and gynecology in the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia registry. A subsample was interviewed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Estimates of rates of mood and sexual side effects of contraceptives in the practice population and how the physicians informed and advised patients about these side effects. RESULTS: There were 79 residents and 76 practising doctors who completed the questionnaires (response rates of 42.0% and 54.7% of eligible residents and physicians, respectively). The reference sources most physicians reported using gave the rates of sexual and mood side effects of hormonal contraceptives as less than 1%, and yet only 1 (0.6%) respondent estimated similar rates for mood side effects, and 12 (7.8%) for sexual effects among their patients. The most common answers were rates of 5% to 10%, with residents reporting similar rates to practising doctors. Practising doctors were more likely to ask about sexual and mood side effects than residents were (81.1% vs. 24.1% and 86.3% vs. 40.5%, respectively; P < .001). Practising doctors were also more likely to recommend switching to barrier methods (37.3% vs. 16.5%; P = .003) or intrauterine devices (54.7% vs. 38.0%; P = .038) than residents were and more likely to give more responses to the question about how they managed sexual and mood side effects (mean of 1.7 vs. 1.1 responses, P = .001). In 14 of the 15 interviews, practising doctors discussed how they had learned about side effects mainly from their patients and how this had changed their practices. CONCLUSION: Physicians' perceived rates of mood and sexual side effects from hormonal contraception in the general population were higher than the rate of less than 1% quoted in the product monographs. Practising doctors reported that they learned about the type, frequency, and severity of side effects from their patients.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".