TABLE 3.

Quality of Evidence of the Contraceptive Uptake Outcome Using the GRADE Approach in Studies Included in the Review, N=8

StudyLimitations of Detailed Design and Execution (Risk of Bias)Unexplained Heterogeneity or Inconsistency of ResultsIndirectness of EvidenceImprecisions of ResultsPublication BiasQuality of Evidence
Smith et al.22−1⊕⊕⊕⊝Moderate
Maslowsky et al.19−2−1⊕⊝⊝⊝Very low
McCarthy et al.20−2⊕⊕⊝⊝ Low
Johnson et al.18−1

⊕⊕⊕⊝

Moderate

Unger et al.23−1

⊕⊕⊕⊝

Moderate

McCarthy et al.21−2

⊕⊕⊝⊝

Low

Biswas et al.24−1−1

⊕⊕⊝⊝

Low

Harrington et al.25−1

⊕⊕⊕⊝

Moderate

  • Randomized controlled trials were considered to be high quality, but were downgraded by 1 level (serious) or 2 levels (very serious) for each of the following: limitations of detailed design and execution (risk of bias) (e.g., limitations in randomization, deviations from intended interventions), unexplained heterogeneity or inconsistency of results, indirectness of evidence, imprecision of results, and presence of publication bias.