Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29736272›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2018

A long way to go: a systematic review to assess the utilisation of sexual and reproductive health services during humanitarian crises.

Neha S Singh, Sarindi Aryasinghe, James Smith, Rajat Khosla, Lale Say, Karl Blanchet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Epidemiology ofBMJ global health · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Neha S SinghHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0057-121X
Sarindi AryasingheCentre for Maternal, Adolescent, Reproductive and Child Health (MARCH), London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
James SmithHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Rajat KhoslaDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Lale SayDepartment of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Karl BlanchetHealth in Humanitarian Crises Centre, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWomen and girls are affected significantly in both sudden and slow-onset emergencies, and face multiple sexual and reproductive health (SRH) challenges in humanitarian crises contexts. There are an estimated 26 million women and girls of reproductive age living in humanitarian crises settings, all of whom need access to SRH information and services. This systematic review aimed to assess the utilisation of services of SRH interventions from the onset of emergencies in low- and middle-income countries.

methodsWe searched for both quantitative and qualitative studies in peer-reviewed journals across the following four databases: EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE and PsychINFO from 1 January 1980 to 10 April 2017. Primary outcomes of interest included self-reported use and/or confirmed use of the Minimum Initial Service Package services and abortion services. Two authors independently extracted and analysed data from published papers on the effect of SRH interventions on a range of SRH care utilisation outcomes from the onset of emergencies, and used a narrative synthesis approach.

resultsOf the 2404 identified citations, 23 studies met the inclusion criteria. 52.1% of the studies (n=12) used quasi-experimental study designs, which provided some statistical measure of difference between intervention and outcome. 39.1% of the studies (n=9) selected were graded as high quality, 39.1% moderate quality (n=9) and 17.4% low quality (n=4). Evidence of effectiveness in increasing service utilisation was available for the following interventions: peer-led and interpersonal education and mass media campaigns, community-based programming and three-tiered network of community-based reproductive and maternal health providers.

conclusionsDespite increased attention to SRH service provision in humanitarian crises settings, the evidence base is still very limited. More implementation research is required to identify interventions to increase utilisation of SRH services in diverse humanitarian crises settings and populations.

Indexed as

health services researchHivmaternal healthother infection, disease, disorder, or injurysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID29736272
PMCPMC5935157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.