Preventing pregnancy: A fresh look at the IUD

CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal

Volumn 169, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 585-

  Weir, Erica ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LEVONORGESTREL; ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE AGENT;

CANADA; CIGARETTE SMOKING; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECTOPIC PREGNANCY; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; MATERNAL WELFARE; NULLIPARA; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; RISK FACTOR; SAFETY; SCREENING; SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE; SHORT SURVEY; TECHNIQUE; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 0141428916     PISSN: 08203946     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Short Survey

References (9)

1. Henshaw S. Unintended pregnancy in the United States. Fam Plann Perspect 1998;30(1):24-9.
2. Induced (therapeutic) abortions. Daily [Health Canada] 2003 Mar 28. Available: www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/030328/d030328e.htm (accessed 2003 Aug 18).
3. Kaunitz A. Reappearance of the intrauterine device: a user-friendly contraceptive. Int J Fertil 1997;42:120-7.
4. Ortiz ME, Croxatto HB, Bardin CW. Mechanisms of action of intrauterine devices. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1996;51:S42-51.
5. Sturridge F, Guillebaud J. A Risk-benefit assessment of the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system. Drug Saf 1996;15:430-40.
6. Andersson K, Odlind V, Rybo G. Levonorgestrel-releasing and copper-releasing (Nova T) IUDs during five years of use: a randomized comparative trial. Contraception 1994;49:56-72.
7. Stewart, GK. Intrauterine devices. In: Contraceptive technology. 17th ed. New York: Ardent Media; 1998. p. 511-44.
8. Shelton J. Risk of clinical pelvic inflammatory disease attributable to an intrauterine device [letter]. Lancet 2001;357:443.
9. Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, Chen JH, Meirik O. Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet 1992;339:785-8.