You are here

Article Text

Article menu

See original article:

Download PDFPDF

Miscellaneous
Correction: Male contraception: where are we going and where have we been?

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2019-200395corr1

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.

    Reynolds-Wright JJ, Anderson RA. Male contraception: where are we going and where have we been? BMJ Sex Reprod Health 2019;45:236–42.

    There is a minor error in the paper. At present the text incorrectly reads: ‘While the trial was stopped early by a WHO review panel due to concern over side effects (despite very few men discontinuing treatment), there were just four pregnancies, giving a contraceptive efficacy of 1.59% (CI 0.6 to 4.2),12 thus matching hormonal female methods and substantially better than condoms, the only current reversible male method.’

    The correct text should be: ‘While the trial was stopped early by a WHO review panel due to concern over side effects (despite very few men discontinuing treatment), there were just four pregnancies, giving a Pearl index of 2.18 pregnancies per 100 person-years (95% CI, 0.82 to 5.80),12 thus matching hormonal female methods and substantially better than condoms, the only current reversible male method.

    Linked Articles