References
- Yusuf F, Siedlecky S. Contraceptive use in Australia: Evidence from the 1995 National Health Survey. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 39: 58–62
- Trussell J. Contraceptive efficacy. Contraceptive technology17th edn., R A Hatcher, J Trussell, F Stewart, et al. Irvington Publishers, New York 1998
- Maher J E, Harvey S M, Bird S T, Stevens V J, Beckman L J. Acceptability of the vaginal diaphragm among current users. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2004; 36: 64–71
- Bird S T, Harvey S M, Maher J E, Beckman L J. Acceptability of an existing, female-controlled contraceptive method that could potentially protect against HIV: a comparison of diaphragm users and other method users. Women's Health Issues 2004; 14: 85–93
- Piccinino L J, Mosher W D. Trends in contraceptive use in the United States. Fam Plann Perspect 1998; 30: 4–10, 46
- Harvey S M, Bird S T, Branch M R. A new look at an old method: the diaphragm. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2003; 35: 270–273
- Mantell J E, Hoffman S, Exner T M, et al. Family planning providers' perspectives on dual protection. Perspect Sex Reprod Health 2003; 35: 71–78
- Bateson D J. Diaphragm use in the FPA Health setting: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of a follow-up check on continuation and unintended pregnancy rates. 2005, requests to author
- Ferreira A E, Araujo M J, Regina C H, et al. Effectiveness of the diaphragm, used continuously without spermicide. Contraception 1993; 48: 29–35
- Smith C, Farr G, Feldblum P J, et al. Effectiveness of the non-spermicidal fit-free diaphragm. Contraception 1995; 51: 289–291