Journals Library

An error occurred retrieving content to display, please try again.

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

{{metadata.Title}}

The 'Contraception Choices' website was popular with young women but was not associated with increased use of long-acting reversible contraception or satisfaction with contraceptive method at 6 months.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index < metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Judith Stephenson 1,*, Julia V Bailey 2, Ann Blandford 3, Nataliya Brima 4, Andrew Copas 4, Preethy D’Souza 5, Anasztazia Gubijev 1, Rachael Hunter 6, Jill Shawe 7, Greta Rait 8, Sandy Oliver 5,9

1 UCL Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Institute for Women’s Health, University College London, London, UK
2 Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
3 UCL Interaction Centre (UCLIC), University College London, London, UK
4 Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK
5 Department of Social Science, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK
6 Health Economics, University College London, London, UK
7 Institute of Health and Community, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
8 PRIMENT Clinical Trials Unit, Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
9 Africa Centre for Evidence, Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa
* Corresponding author Email: Judith.stephenson@ucl.ac.uk

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation: {{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al.' : ''}} {{metadata.Title}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

 

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 2 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions