Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27631756›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of public health2016

Quality of Care in a Safe-Abortion Hotline in Indonesia: Beyond Harm Reduction.

Caitlin Gerdts, Inna Hudaya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Telemedicine for medical abortion: a systematic review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Caitlin GerdtsCaitlin Gerdts is with Ibis Reproductive Health, Oakland, CA. Inna Hudaya is with Samsara, Indonesia.
Inna HudayaCaitlin Gerdts is with Ibis Reproductive Health, Oakland, CA. Inna Hudaya is with Samsara, Indonesia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine services offered by safe-abortion hotlines in contexts in which abortion is legally restricted and to document the experiences of women contacting a safe-abortion hotline in Indonesia.

methodsWe analyzed 1829 first-time contacts to a safe-abortion hotline in Indonesia as a part of routine service provision between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014.

resultsNearly one third (29.9%) of initial contacts reported their age as between 18 and 24 years, and most (51.2%) reported being unmarried. When asked about their reason for calling the hotline, the majority of initial contacts stated that they were pregnant and not ready to have a child. More than one third reported gestational ages below 12 weeks, and nearly one fifth (18.3%) reported a gestation of 13 weeks or greater.

conclusionsThese unique data provide a window of understanding into who contacts safe-abortion hotlines and why, and enable exploration of future directions for research on the role of safe-abortion hotlines in women's access to safe abortion. Public Health Implications. Safe-abortion hotlines should be evaluated not only for reducing harm but also for providing high-quality abortion care.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAdolescentAdultFemaleGestational AgeHealth Services AccessibilityHotlinesHumansIndonesiaMarital StatusQuality of Health CareSocioeconomic FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID27631756
PMCPMC5055796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.