Table 2.
Outcomes | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Medium-term | Short-term | |||||||||||
Reference | Quality | Long-term: Decreased pregnancy rate | Increased contraceptive use | Increased use of more effective contraception | Increased correct use of contraception | Increased continuation of contraceptive use | Increased dual-method contraceptive use | Increased repeat or follow-up service use | Increased knowledge | Enhanced other psychosocial determinants | Client experiences: Increased quality and satisfaction with services | Total outcomes with positive impact for studya |
Berger (1987)27 |
Level II–3; high risk for bias | NA | ↑ | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 1/1 |
Winter (1991)26 |
Level II-1; high risk for bias | ↔ | ↑ | NA | NA | ↑ | NA | NA | ↑ | ↑ | ↔ | 4/6 |
Hanna (1993)29 |
Level I; moderate risk for bias | NA | NA | NA | ↑ | NA | NA | NA | NA | ↔ | NA | 1/2 |
Cowley (2002)28 |
Level II–3; high risk for bias | NA | b | b | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 0/0 |
Brindis (2005)24 |
Level II–3; high risk for bias | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | NA | NA | NA | ↑ | NA | NA | NA | 4/4 |
Kirby (2010)25 |
Level I; moderate risk for bias | ↔ | ↔ | NA | ↔ | NA | NA | ↔ | NA | NA | ↔ | 0/5 |
Martin (2011)c,17,18 |
Level II–3; high risk for bias | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | b | NA | NA | NA | 0/0 |
Berenson (2012)c,12 |
Level I; high risk for bias | ↔ | ↔ | NA | ↑/↔ | ↔ | ↔ | NA | NA | NA | NA | 1/5 |
Redding (2015)c,20 |
Level I; moderate risk for bias | NA | NA | NA | ↑/↔ | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 1/1 |
Total studies with positive impacta | 1/4 | 3/6 | 1/2 | 3/4 | 1/2 | 0/1 | 1/3 | 1/1 | 1/2 | 0/2 |
Note: ↑statistically significant positive impact; ↓statistically significant negative impact;↔no evidence of a statistically significant impact. All studies examined a specific counseling intervention.
Statistically significant.
No statistical testing conducted.
Newly identified evidencesince2015review. NA, not assessed.