Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27497139›Full record

ArticleHealth policy and planning2017

Incidence and determinants of hysterectomy in a low-income setting in Gujarat, India.

Sapna Desai, Oona Mr Campbell, Tara Sinha, Ajay Mahal, Simon Cousens

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy and planning, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. An audit of hysterectomy in a teaching hospital in India: Story of a decade.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Uterine Factor Infertility, a Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sapna DesaiDept of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, UK sapna.i.desai@gmail.com.
Oona Mr CampbellDept of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
Tara SinhaSelf Employed Women's Association (SEWA) Health; Chanda Niwas, Nr Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad 380006, Gujarat India.
Ajay MahalNossal Institute for Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia.
Simon CousensDept of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Keppel St, London WC1E 7HT, UK.
University of London · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hysterectomy is a leading reason for use of health insurance amongst low-income women in India, but there are limited population-level data available to inform policy. This paper reports on the findings of a mixed-methods study to estimate incidence and identify predictors of hysterectomy in a low-income setting in Gujarat, India. The estimated incidence of hysterectomy, 20.7/1000 woman- years (95% CI: 14.0, 30.8), was considerably higher than reported from other countries, at a relatively low mean age of 36 years. There was strong evidence that among women of reproductive age, those with lower income and at least two children underwent hysterectomy at higher rates. Nearly two-thirds of women undergoing hysterectomy utilized private hospitals, while the remainder used government or other non-profit facilities. Qualitative research suggested that weak sexual and reproductive health services, a widespread perception that the post-reproductive uterus is dispensable and lack of knowledge of side effects have resulted in the normalization of hysterectomy. Hysterectomy appears to be promoted as a first or second-line treatment for menstrual and gynaecological disorders that are actually amenable to less invasive procedures. Most women sought at least two medical opinions prior to hysterectomy, but both public and private providers lacked equipment, skills and motivation to offer alternatives. Profit and training benefits also appeared to play a role in some providers' behaviour. Although women with insecure employment underwent the procedure knowing the financial and physical implications of undergoing a major surgery, the future health and work security afforded by hysterectomy appeared to them to outweigh risks. Findings suggest that sterilization may be associated with an increased risk of hysterectomy, potentially through biological or attitudinal links. Health policy interventions require improved access to sexual and reproductive health services and health education, along with surveillance and medical audits to promote high-quality choices for women through the life cycle.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeIncidenceAdultCohort StudiesFamily CharacteristicsFemaleHumansHysterectomyIndiaInsurance, HealthMenstruation DisturbancesPovertySterilization, TubalGynaecologicalhysterectomyIndiamenstrualreproductive healthsterilization

Identifiers

PMID27497139
PMCPMC5886266
OpenAlexW2477817728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.