PCI Registered Reports

Announcements

Please note that we will be CLOSED to ALL SUBMISSIONS from 1 December 2024 through 12 January 2025 to give our recommenders and reviewers a holiday break.

We are recruiting recommenders (editors) from all research fields!

Your feedback matters! If you have authored or reviewed a Registered Report at Peer Community in Registered Reports, then please take 5 minutes to leave anonymous feedback about your experience, and view community ratings.

Back

355

Title *

Hormonal Contraceptive Use and Women’s Sexuality and Well-Being: Estimating Treatment Effects and Their Heterogeneity Based on Longitudinal Datause asterix (*) to get italics

Authors *

Laura J. Botzet, Julia M. Rohrer, Lars Penke, and Ruben C. ArslanPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year *

2023

Picture

Abstract *

<p>Different women experience hormonal contraceptives differently, reporting side effects on their sexuality and well-being that range from negative to positive. But research on such causal effects of hormonal contraceptives on psychological outcomes struggles both to identify average causal effects and capture the high heterogeneity in women’s treatment responses. In this study, we plan to leverage longitudinal data to improve our ability to separate the causal effects of hormonal contraceptives from other sources of association, including observed and unobserved confounding, reverse causality, and attrition. We will analyze data from up to 6,565 women who participated in PAIRFAM, a German longitudinal panel dataset consisting of 13 waves using Bayesian multilevel regressions. To deal with confounding and probe the robustness of findings, we will implement two analysis approaches: adjusted regression analyses and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses. Furthermore, to move beyond average treatment effects, we will analyze heterogeneity in treatment responses and test whether interindividual differences can predict such heterogeneity. Lastly, we will investigate whether treatment response predicts women’s decisions about which contraceptive method to use in the long run. Our results will help to understand the impact of hormonal contraception on sexuality and well-being in a naturalistic setting in which women adapt their contraception to their own experiences.</p> <div id="hzPanel"></div> <div id="hzPanel"></div>

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@rr.peercommunityin.org). *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords (optional)

causal inference, contraception, hormones, longitudinal analyses, sexuality, well-being

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields *

Social sciences

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

Submission date

2022-11-30 13:20:14

Recommender

Thomas Evans

Reviewers

or Register
Submit a report

Announcements

MANAGING BOARD

MEMBER OF

INDEXED BY