MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412807326 · doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2025.105800

Do combined oral contraceptives have long-term effects? Little evidence of an enduring effect on cognitive function in former users

2025· article· en· W4412807326 on OpenAlexafffund
Elizabeth Hampson

Bibliographic record

VenueHormones and Behavior · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTerm (time)CognitionPsychologyFunction (biology)MedicinePsychiatryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of combined oral contraceptives (COCs) is associated with subtle differences in brain activity and in certain cognitive, perceptual, or affective processes among current COC users compared with non-users. Whether any differences persist after the COCs are discontinued is essentially unknown. In a retrospective analysis of a cognitive dataset from healthy adults ( N = 221, M age = 23.78 yrs), we asked whether any residual effects of COC use could be identified in former users (who had discontinued their COCs ∼30 mo prior) on standardized tests of verbal fluency and visuospatial function. A detailed reproductive history was available, including specifics of any past COC use. Cognition was evaluated during the early follicular phase of the menstrual cycle when the ovaries are quiescent and hormone production is lowest. Based on their reproductive history, participants were classified as former users of COCs ( N = 86, mean duration of COC use = 29.89 mo), never-users ( N = 106, no past use of hormonal contraceptives), or current users ( N = 29, currently using a COC, mean duration of COC use = 29.72 mo). All COCs contained either levonorgestrel or a progestin from the norethindrone family, and 30–35 μg/day of ethinyl estradiol. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) contrasting cognitive performance in the 3 groups showed that despite the use of androgenic progestins and an estradiol dose that was relatively high, there was no evidence of a difference between former-users and never-users on any of the cognitive tests. Current users scored lower than former or never users on a conventional visuospatial task (Space Relations). Partial correlations controlling for age, estimated IQ, and pregnancy history revealed that duration of past COC use in former users was significantly associated with verbal fluency on one of two phonemic fluency tasks administered. A longer duration of COC use was associated with poorer word generation ability. This dataset produced little evidence of any enduring effects of COC use, however a duration-dependent association between former COC use and verbal fluency reinforces a similar trend reported previously among current users. • Compared 86 former users of oral contraceptives, 106 never users, 29 current users. • Cognitive performance evaluated during the early follicular phase of cycle. • No group differences on 5 tests of verbal fluency and visuospatial abilities • Duration of past use was negatively correlated with word production in former users. • A group of current users showed lower mean accuracy on the Space Relations Test.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHormones and BehaviorSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207