You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 43, Issue 4
  • Authors' response to ’Comment on ’Effects of injectable progestogen contraception versus the copper intrauterine device on HIV acquisition: sub-study of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial' '

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter to the editor
Authors' response to ’Comment on ’Effects of injectable progestogen contraception versus the copper intrauterine device on HIV acquisition: sub-study of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial' '
  1. G Justus Hofmeyr1,
  2. Theresa Anne Lawrie2,3
  1. 1 Effective Care Research Unit, Eastern Cape, Department of Health, Universities of the Witwatersrand, Walter Sisulu and Fort Hare, East London, South Africa; justhof@gmail.com
  2. 2 Effective Care Research Unit, Eastern Cape, Department of Health, Universities of the Witwatersrand, Walter Sisulu and Fort Hare, East London, South Africa
  3. 3 Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK; tess@lawrie.com
  1. Correspondence to Dr Theresa Anne Lawrie; tess{at}lawrie.com

https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2017-101864

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We thank Quispe Calla and colleagues for their insightful comments1 on our article.2 We agree that basic science evidence showing that various progestogens increase HIV susceptibility is compelling. We also agree that randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are informative regarding the relative risks of HIV between contraceptive alternatives, but not the absolute risks …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors GJH wrote this letter response on behalf of all the study authors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles