1. A 12-month multicenter, randomized study comparing the levonorgestrel intrauterine system with the etonogestrel subdermal implant 
Dan Apter, M.D., Ph.D., Paula Briggs, M.B.Ch.B., Marjo Tuppurainen, M.D., Julia Grunert, M.Sc., Eeva Lukkari-Lax, M.D., Ph.D., Sarah Rybowski, M.B.B.S., Kristina Gemzell-Danielsson, M.D., Ph.D. 
Fertility and Sterility 
Volume 106, Issue 1, Pages e5 (July 2016)
DOI: /j.fertnstert
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions

2. Supplemental Figure 1
Disposition of women in the study. aModified intention-to-treat set: all women for whom at least one placement attempt was made. bFull analysis set: all women who had a successful placement/insertion. ENG = etonogestrel; LNG-IUS 8 = levonorgestrel intrauterine system total content 13.5 mg (average, ∼8 μg/24 hours during the first year).
Fertility and Sterility  , e5DOI: ( /j.fertnstert )
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions

3. Supplemental Figure 2
Mean number of bleeding and spotting days by 90-day reference intervalsa (modified intention-to-treat setb) in the LNG-IUS 8 and ENG implant groups. aThe numbers of bleeding and spotting days were not recorded at baseline. bModified intention-to-treat set: all women for whom at least one placement/insertion attempt was made. ENG = etonogestrel; LNG-IUS 8 = levonorgestrel intrauterine system total content 13.5 mg (average, ∼8 μg/24 hours during the first year).
Fertility and Sterility  , e5DOI: ( /j.fertnstert )
Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine Terms and Conditions