1French R, Cowan F, Mansour D,et al. Hormonally impregnated intrauterine systems (IUSs), versus other forms ofreversible contraceptives as effective methods of preventing pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2001 ,(2):CD001776.
2O'Brien PA, Marfleet C. Frameless versus classical intrauterine device for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2001, (4):CD003282.
3Martinez F, Gimenez E, Hemandez G, et al. Experience with Gyne-FIX insertions in Spain: favorable acceptance of the intrauterine contraceptive implant with some limitations. Contraception, 2002, 66(5):315-320.
4Otero-Flores J-B, Cuerrero-Carreno FJ, Vazquez-Estrada LA.A comparative randomized study of three different IUDs in nulliparous Mexican women. Contraception, 2003 , 67(4):273-276.
5Masters T, Everett S, May M, et al. Avon Brook, Bristol, UK. Outcomes at 1 year for the first 200 patients fitted with GyneFix at Margaret Pyke Centre. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care,2002,7(2):65-70.
6Dennis J, Webb A, Kishen M. Expulsions following 1000 GyneFix insertions. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care,2001,27(3):135-138.
7Avecilla-Palau A, Moreno V. Uterine factors and risk of pregnancy in IUD users: a nested case-control study. Contraception, 2003, 67:235-239.
8Harrison-Woolrych M, Ashton J, Coulter D. Insertion of the multiload Cu375 intrauterine device; experience in over 16000 new Zealand women. Contraception, 2002,66(1):387-391.
9El-Tagy A, Sakr E, Sokal DC, et al. Safety and acceptability of postabortal IUD insertion and the importance of counseling. Contraception, 2003,67(3):229-234.
10Backman T, Huhtala S, Luoto R, et al. Advance information improves user satisfaction with the levonorgestrel intrauterine system. Obstet Gynecol, 2002,99(4):608-613.
