The study used the prospective cohort study design throughout the research in order to examine the results of the data. The results indicated that the mortality between the two cohorts of ever users and non-users both suffered mortality. The disadvantage with this research and which is part of its greatest weakness is that despite the great longitudinal research and analysis, the research is based only in the US and hence the results cannot be generalized globally. However, the all-cause mortality was established to take place among the never users of the oral contraceptives while the ever users did not suffer any mortality. When it came to specific mortality the ever users suffered more from violent as well as accidental deaths than the never users (Charlton, et al. 2014).The authors have just mentioned that even though their research on the long-term effects of oral contraceptives use has never been addressed, there are other papers which have mentioned the various health risks associated with the use of oral contraceptives. These papers and their references have however not been analyzed further and how they may have contributed to the results of this research. The Royal College of General Practitioners research, for example, discusses the mortality risk women face when using the oral contraceptives which are different from what never users of the contraceptives face. The results of these two studies are similar in every way the only difference being one was carried out in the UK and this one in the US (Hannaford, et al. 2010). The paper on the Oxford-Family Planning Association contraceptive program with almost similar aims was also missing. These two studies would have made the perfect background for this research and for the readers to have a clue of what was taking place and hence a better understanding of the results.