Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mills, A.
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, I. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mills, A.
Right arrow Articles by Edwards, I. R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 14, No. 1, 7-10, January 1999
© 1999 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Debate Continued

The combined oral contraceptive pill - are poor communication systems responsible for loss of confidence in this contraceptive method?

Angela Mills1,3 and I. Ralph Edwards2

1 Department of Gynaecology, University College Hospitals London, The United Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Hospital & Hospital for Women Soho, 144 Euston Road, London NW1 7AJ, UK, and 2 The Uppsala Monitoring Centre, WHO Collaborating Centre for International Drug Monitoring, Stora Torget 3, S-753 20 Uppsala, Sweden

The constant negative drip of unbalanced information from the lay press makes it impossible for the professionals and consumers to interpret the true risks and benefits of drugs. This can have a serious effect on the quality of life, not only in the target population. A recent, almost weekly, newspaper campaign surrounding the combined oral contraceptive pill (COC) claimed that in the past 4 years, 50 deaths of women had been associated with the use of the oral contraceptive pill in the UK (Davies, 1998). The message once again is that the pill kills. This figure, even if true, would be the equivalent of approximately four deaths per million women pill users per year in the UK. This would equate with the death rate from terminations of pregnancy (HMSO, 1996Go) and be considerably lower than the death rate from other life events such as pregnancy—which is 98 per million . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Benefit and risk balance

The players

Communication

Content of the message

Purpose of message and state of mind of the intended recipient(s)

General context or climate in which the message will be perceived

Communication media to be used

Feedback mechanisms

Monitoring and evaluation

Discussion and conclusions

Notes

References


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
G. D. Palermo, T. Takeuchi, and Z. Rosenwaks
Technical approaches to correction of oocyte aneuploidy
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2002; 17(8): 2165 - 2173.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. C. Tsai, T. Takeuchi, J.M. Bedford, M. M. Reis, Z. Rosenwaks, and G. D. Palermo
Alternative sources of gametes: reality or science fiction?
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2000; 15(5): 988 - 998.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]