Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010
Abstract Background Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) is available as levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate. In 2013, evidence from clinical studies prompted a revision of product information to indicate reduced efficacy of one levenorgestral-containing EHC in women weighing more than 75 kg, an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Lancet (British edition) 2015-11, Vol.386, p.S79-S79 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | S79 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | S79 |
container_title | The Lancet (British edition) |
container_volume | 386 |
creator | Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD Craig, Rachel, BA Mindell, Jennifer, PhD Anderson, Jane, Prof Guthrie, Kate, MBBS Johnson, Anne M, Prof Nardone, Anthony, PhD |
description | Abstract Background Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) is available as levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate. In 2013, evidence from clinical studies prompted a revision of product information to indicate reduced efficacy of one levenorgestral-containing EHC in women weighing more than 75 kg, and inefficacy in those weighing more than 80 kg. The European Medicines Agency subsequently reviewed evidence on EHC efficacy and concluded that available data were inconclusive. If future research were to substantiate an association between EHC efficacy and bodyweight, an understanding of the potential impact at a population level would be important. We used data from the Health Survey for England (HSE), 2010, to explore this potential impact. Methods The Health Survey for England is an annually conducted nationally representative household survey of the general population resident in England. Information on participants’ health and wellbeing and sociodemographic information are collected with face-to-face interviews, self-completed questionnaire booklets, and a nurse visit. In 2010, questions about sexual behaviour and contraceptive use, including EHC use in the 12 months preceding the interview, were included. Overall survey response among women was 63%. 92% completed the self-completion booklet, of whom 5% did not complete questions on contraception. We estimated EHC use in 1508 sexually experienced (reporting at least one sexual partner over the lifetime to the date of the interview) 16–44-year-old women stratified by bodyweight (measured as part of the nurse visit). Findings 9% (95% CI 8–11) of sexually experienced 16–44-year-old women reported EHC use in the previous year. EHC use was reported more frequently among younger women (20% in 16–24 year olds, 8% in 25–34 year olds, and 3% in 35–44 year olds). Among women who reported EHC use in the previous year, 33% (95% CI 25–43) weighed more than 75 kg, and 67% (57–75) weighed 75 kg or less. 22% (15–31) weighed more than 80 kg, and 7% (6–9) weighed more than 95 kg. Interpretation EHC could be ineffective in a substantial proportion of users if effectiveness were found to be lower among those with higher bodyweight. Young women would be particularly affected given the higher rates of EHC use in this group. However, larger proportions of older women, who use EHC less frequently, weigh over 75 kg. Existing guidance advises EHC use irrespective of body weight, and thus research is urgently needed to determine the |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00917-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1732854823</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0140673615009174</els_id><sourcerecordid>3865127151</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2844-b6bf6ac2abb4dce8e49b3f30a54cda3becc1358b3dd1e2ef7a7a74b1822a18cd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkEtLw0AQxxdRsD4-grDgRcHoPpPoQRGpDxA8VMHbso9Ju5pm625aybc3bUXBi8xhYPjPj5kfQgeUnFJC87MRoYJkecHzIyqPCTmnRSY20ICKQmRSFK-baPAT2UY7Kb0RQkRO5AC9D6cQx9DYDk9CnIZG19iGpo3awqz1ocG6cdgE1-FP8ONJe9EPdN0ln3CosNOtxlUMU9xOAN-DrtsJHs3jAjpchYiHzbjuASeYEUr20Fal6wT7330XvdwOn2_us8enu4eb68fMslKIzOSmyrVl2hjhLJQgzg2vONFSWKe5AWspl6XhzlFgUBW6L2FoyZimpXV8Fx2uubMYPuaQWvUW5rG_OilacFZKUTLep-Q6ZWNIKUKlZtFPdewUJWrpVa28qqU0RaVaeVWi37ta70H_wsJDVMn6XiA4H8G2ygX_L-HyD8HWvvFW1-_QQfo9ViWmyBqyZFC5Igj-BZYplTQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1732854823</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc ; Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD ; Craig, Rachel, BA ; Mindell, Jennifer, PhD ; Anderson, Jane, Prof ; Guthrie, Kate, MBBS ; Johnson, Anne M, Prof ; Nardone, Anthony, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc ; Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD ; Craig, Rachel, BA ; Mindell, Jennifer, PhD ; Anderson, Jane, Prof ; Guthrie, Kate, MBBS ; Johnson, Anne M, Prof ; Nardone, Anthony, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) is available as levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate. In 2013, evidence from clinical studies prompted a revision of product information to indicate reduced efficacy of one levenorgestral-containing EHC in women weighing more than 75 kg, and inefficacy in those weighing more than 80 kg. The European Medicines Agency subsequently reviewed evidence on EHC efficacy and concluded that available data were inconclusive. If future research were to substantiate an association between EHC efficacy and bodyweight, an understanding of the potential impact at a population level would be important. We used data from the Health Survey for England (HSE), 2010, to explore this potential impact. Methods The Health Survey for England is an annually conducted nationally representative household survey of the general population resident in England. Information on participants’ health and wellbeing and sociodemographic information are collected with face-to-face interviews, self-completed questionnaire booklets, and a nurse visit. In 2010, questions about sexual behaviour and contraceptive use, including EHC use in the 12 months preceding the interview, were included. Overall survey response among women was 63%. 92% completed the self-completion booklet, of whom 5% did not complete questions on contraception. We estimated EHC use in 1508 sexually experienced (reporting at least one sexual partner over the lifetime to the date of the interview) 16–44-year-old women stratified by bodyweight (measured as part of the nurse visit). Findings 9% (95% CI 8–11) of sexually experienced 16–44-year-old women reported EHC use in the previous year. EHC use was reported more frequently among younger women (20% in 16–24 year olds, 8% in 25–34 year olds, and 3% in 35–44 year olds). Among women who reported EHC use in the previous year, 33% (95% CI 25–43) weighed more than 75 kg, and 67% (57–75) weighed 75 kg or less. 22% (15–31) weighed more than 80 kg, and 7% (6–9) weighed more than 95 kg. Interpretation EHC could be ineffective in a substantial proportion of users if effectiveness were found to be lower among those with higher bodyweight. Young women would be particularly affected given the higher rates of EHC use in this group. However, larger proportions of older women, who use EHC less frequently, weigh over 75 kg. Existing guidance advises EHC use irrespective of body weight, and thus research is urgently needed to determine the association between body weight and EHC efficacy. Funding The Health Survey for England was funded by the Health and Social Care Information Centre.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-6736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-547X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00917-4</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LANCAO</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Body weight ; Internal Medicine ; Polls & surveys ; Sexual behavior</subject><ispartof>The Lancet (British edition), 2015-11, Vol.386, p.S79-S79</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2015 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Nov 13, 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2844-b6bf6ac2abb4dce8e49b3f30a54cda3becc1358b3dd1e2ef7a7a74b1822a18cd3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673615009174$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Rachel, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mindell, Jennifer, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Jane, Prof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guthrie, Kate, MBBS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Anne M, Prof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nardone, Anthony, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010</title><title>The Lancet (British edition)</title><description>Abstract Background Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) is available as levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate. In 2013, evidence from clinical studies prompted a revision of product information to indicate reduced efficacy of one levenorgestral-containing EHC in women weighing more than 75 kg, and inefficacy in those weighing more than 80 kg. The European Medicines Agency subsequently reviewed evidence on EHC efficacy and concluded that available data were inconclusive. If future research were to substantiate an association between EHC efficacy and bodyweight, an understanding of the potential impact at a population level would be important. We used data from the Health Survey for England (HSE), 2010, to explore this potential impact. Methods The Health Survey for England is an annually conducted nationally representative household survey of the general population resident in England. Information on participants’ health and wellbeing and sociodemographic information are collected with face-to-face interviews, self-completed questionnaire booklets, and a nurse visit. In 2010, questions about sexual behaviour and contraceptive use, including EHC use in the 12 months preceding the interview, were included. Overall survey response among women was 63%. 92% completed the self-completion booklet, of whom 5% did not complete questions on contraception. We estimated EHC use in 1508 sexually experienced (reporting at least one sexual partner over the lifetime to the date of the interview) 16–44-year-old women stratified by bodyweight (measured as part of the nurse visit). Findings 9% (95% CI 8–11) of sexually experienced 16–44-year-old women reported EHC use in the previous year. EHC use was reported more frequently among younger women (20% in 16–24 year olds, 8% in 25–34 year olds, and 3% in 35–44 year olds). Among women who reported EHC use in the previous year, 33% (95% CI 25–43) weighed more than 75 kg, and 67% (57–75) weighed 75 kg or less. 22% (15–31) weighed more than 80 kg, and 7% (6–9) weighed more than 95 kg. Interpretation EHC could be ineffective in a substantial proportion of users if effectiveness were found to be lower among those with higher bodyweight. Young women would be particularly affected given the higher rates of EHC use in this group. However, larger proportions of older women, who use EHC less frequently, weigh over 75 kg. Existing guidance advises EHC use irrespective of body weight, and thus research is urgently needed to determine the association between body weight and EHC efficacy. Funding The Health Survey for England was funded by the Health and Social Care Information Centre.</description><subject>Body weight</subject><subject>Internal Medicine</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Sexual behavior</subject><issn>0140-6736</issn><issn>1474-547X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkEtLw0AQxxdRsD4-grDgRcHoPpPoQRGpDxA8VMHbso9Ju5pm625aybc3bUXBi8xhYPjPj5kfQgeUnFJC87MRoYJkecHzIyqPCTmnRSY20ICKQmRSFK-baPAT2UY7Kb0RQkRO5AC9D6cQx9DYDk9CnIZG19iGpo3awqz1ocG6cdgE1-FP8ONJe9EPdN0ln3CosNOtxlUMU9xOAN-DrtsJHs3jAjpchYiHzbjuASeYEUr20Fal6wT7330XvdwOn2_us8enu4eb68fMslKIzOSmyrVl2hjhLJQgzg2vONFSWKe5AWspl6XhzlFgUBW6L2FoyZimpXV8Fx2uubMYPuaQWvUW5rG_OilacFZKUTLep-Q6ZWNIKUKlZtFPdewUJWrpVa28qqU0RaVaeVWi37ta70H_wsJDVMn6XiA4H8G2ygX_L-HyD8HWvvFW1-_QQfo9ViWmyBqyZFC5Igj-BZYplTQ</recordid><startdate>20151113</startdate><enddate>20151113</enddate><creator>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc</creator><creator>Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD</creator><creator>Craig, Rachel, BA</creator><creator>Mindell, Jennifer, PhD</creator><creator>Anderson, Jane, Prof</creator><creator>Guthrie, Kate, MBBS</creator><creator>Johnson, Anne M, Prof</creator><creator>Nardone, Anthony, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0TT</scope><scope>0TZ</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8C2</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KB~</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151113</creationdate><title>Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010</title><author>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc ; Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD ; Craig, Rachel, BA ; Mindell, Jennifer, PhD ; Anderson, Jane, Prof ; Guthrie, Kate, MBBS ; Johnson, Anne M, Prof ; Nardone, Anthony, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2844-b6bf6ac2abb4dce8e49b3f30a54cda3becc1358b3dd1e2ef7a7a74b1822a18cd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Body weight</topic><topic>Internal Medicine</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Sexual behavior</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craig, Rachel, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mindell, Jennifer, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Anderson, Jane, Prof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guthrie, Kate, MBBS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Anne M, Prof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nardone, Anthony, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>News PRO</collection><collection>Pharma and Biotech Premium PRO</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Lancet Titles</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Newsstand Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Woodhall, Sarah C, MSc</au><au>Lowndes, Catherine M, PhD</au><au>Craig, Rachel, BA</au><au>Mindell, Jennifer, PhD</au><au>Anderson, Jane, Prof</au><au>Guthrie, Kate, MBBS</au><au>Johnson, Anne M, Prof</au><au>Nardone, Anthony, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010</atitle><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle><date>2015-11-13</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>386</volume><spage>S79</spage><epage>S79</epage><pages>S79-S79</pages><issn>0140-6736</issn><eissn>1474-547X</eissn><coden>LANCAO</coden><abstract>Abstract Background Emergency hormonal contraception (EHC) is available as levonorgestrel and ulipristal acetate. In 2013, evidence from clinical studies prompted a revision of product information to indicate reduced efficacy of one levenorgestral-containing EHC in women weighing more than 75 kg, and inefficacy in those weighing more than 80 kg. The European Medicines Agency subsequently reviewed evidence on EHC efficacy and concluded that available data were inconclusive. If future research were to substantiate an association between EHC efficacy and bodyweight, an understanding of the potential impact at a population level would be important. We used data from the Health Survey for England (HSE), 2010, to explore this potential impact. Methods The Health Survey for England is an annually conducted nationally representative household survey of the general population resident in England. Information on participants’ health and wellbeing and sociodemographic information are collected with face-to-face interviews, self-completed questionnaire booklets, and a nurse visit. In 2010, questions about sexual behaviour and contraceptive use, including EHC use in the 12 months preceding the interview, were included. Overall survey response among women was 63%. 92% completed the self-completion booklet, of whom 5% did not complete questions on contraception. We estimated EHC use in 1508 sexually experienced (reporting at least one sexual partner over the lifetime to the date of the interview) 16–44-year-old women stratified by bodyweight (measured as part of the nurse visit). Findings 9% (95% CI 8–11) of sexually experienced 16–44-year-old women reported EHC use in the previous year. EHC use was reported more frequently among younger women (20% in 16–24 year olds, 8% in 25–34 year olds, and 3% in 35–44 year olds). Among women who reported EHC use in the previous year, 33% (95% CI 25–43) weighed more than 75 kg, and 67% (57–75) weighed 75 kg or less. 22% (15–31) weighed more than 80 kg, and 7% (6–9) weighed more than 95 kg. Interpretation EHC could be ineffective in a substantial proportion of users if effectiveness were found to be lower among those with higher bodyweight. Young women would be particularly affected given the higher rates of EHC use in this group. However, larger proportions of older women, who use EHC less frequently, weigh over 75 kg. Existing guidance advises EHC use irrespective of body weight, and thus research is urgently needed to determine the association between body weight and EHC efficacy. Funding The Health Survey for England was funded by the Health and Social Care Information Centre.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00917-4</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0140-6736 |
ispartof | The Lancet (British edition), 2015-11, Vol.386, p.S79-S79 |
issn | 0140-6736 1474-547X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1732854823 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Body weight Internal Medicine Polls & surveys Sexual behavior |
title | Emergency hormonal contraception and body weight: analysis of data from the Health Survey for England, 2010 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T02%3A35%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Emergency%20hormonal%20contraception%20and%20body%20weight:%20analysis%20of%20data%20from%20the%20Health%20Survey%20for%20England,%202010&rft.jtitle=The%20Lancet%20(British%20edition)&rft.au=Woodhall,%20Sarah%20C,%20MSc&rft.date=2015-11-13&rft.volume=386&rft.spage=S79&rft.epage=S79&rft.pages=S79-S79&rft.issn=0140-6736&rft.eissn=1474-547X&rft.coden=LANCAO&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00917-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3865127151%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1732854823&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0140673615009174&rfr_iscdi=true |