Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31147364›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2019

Seeking culturally safe care: a qualitative systematic review of the healthcare experiences of women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting.

Catrin Evans, Ritah Tweheyo, Julie McGarry, Jeanette Eldridge, Juliet Albert, Valentine Nkoyo, Gina Marie Awoko Higginbottom

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Risk factors for not proceeding to reconstructive surgery after female genital mutilation: A cohort study of 220 women in a specialized referral center.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. "Frontiers in global women's health · 2026
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Catrin EvansSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5338-2191
Ritah TweheyoSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4609-7253
Julie McGarrySchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Jeanette EldridgeResearch and Learning Services, School of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Juliet AlbertDepartment of Midwifery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Valentine NkoyoMojatu Foundation, Nottingham, UK.
Gina Marie Awoko HigginbottomSchool of Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8851-0985
University of Nottingham · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health HS&DR/15/137/04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the experiences of accessing and receiving healthcare related to female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) across the life course from the perspective of women and girls who have undergone FGM/C.

designA systematic review of qualitative research studies using a thematic synthesis approach.

methodsInclusion criteria were qualitative studies (including grey literature) of any design, from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, of any date and any language. Sixteen electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2017, supplemented by reference list searching. Papers were screened, selected and quality-appraised by two reviewers using established tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute. NVivo software was used to extract study characteristics and code study findings. An inductive thematic synthesis approach was undertaken to identify descriptive themes and interpret these into higher order analytical constructs. Confidence in the review findings was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations-Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual).

resultsFifty-seven papers (from 55 distinct studies) from 14 different OECD countries were included (50% published within the last 8 years). One-third of studies focused exclusively on maternity care experiences, whereas others covered a range of foci. No studies reported explicitly on girls' experiences or on experiences of health service-led safeguarding interventions. Only three studies addressed psychological care. The synthesis developed 17 descriptive themes, organised into 5 analytical constructs. These related to communication, access to care, experiences of cultural dissonance/integrity, disempowering care experiences and positive care encounters. The themes illuminate significant challenges to obtaining timely and holistic care (especially for deinfibulation), and highlight different ways in which women may experience care as disrespectful, unsafe and disempowering. Key elements of 'culturally safe care' are identified.

conclusionsThis review has highlighted key knowledge gaps, especially around (1) girls'/unmarried women's experiences and (2) the impact of recent safeguarding interventions. There is an ongoing need for community engagement, service development and staff training. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420150300012015.

Indexed as

Culturally Competent CareSelf CareAdolescentAdultBody ImageCircumcision, FemaleCommunicationCommunication BarriersFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansInterpersonal RelationsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePower, PsychologicalSexual PartnersSocial IdentificationCERQualdeinfibulationfemale genital cuttingfemale genital mutilationqualitative systematic reviewthematic synthesis

Identifiers

PMID31147364
PMCPMC6549627
OpenAlexW2947810041

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.