ArticleInternational journal of fertility & sterility2019
Estimating The Annual Abortion Rate in Kerman, Iran: Comparison of Direct, Network Scale-Up, and Single Sample Count Methods.
Article in International journal of fertility & sterility, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Decade of Discovery: Methodological Innovation, Capacity Building, and Global Leadership in Hidden Population Research in Iran.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2026Article
- Evaluating miscarriage incidence after COVID-19 vaccination.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Domestic Violence against Women and Its Visibility in Southeast Iran.Iranian journal of public health · 2023Article
- Population size estimation of female sex workers using network scale-up method in Kermanshah city.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Hidden figures: Revisiting doping prevalence estimates previously reported for two major international sport events in the context of further empirical evidence and the extant literature.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
- Estimating the prevalence of high-risk behaviors using network scale-up method in medical university students.Journal of education and health promotion · 2022Article
- Population Size Estimation of Drug Users in Isfahan City (Iran) Using Network Scale-up Method in 2018.Addiction & health · 2021Article
- Using Social Networks to Estimate the Number of COVID-19 Cases: The Incident (Hidden COVID-19 Cases Network Estimation) Study Protocol.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Public Stigma Toward Female and Male Opium and Heroin Users. An Experimental Test of Attribution Theory and the Familiarity Hypothesis.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAbortion is a sensitive issue surrounded by social, cultural and religious stigmata. Therefore, estimation of its prevalence involves methodological challenges. The aim of this manuscript is to estimate the abortion prevalence, stratified by type, using a direct and two indirect methods. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional study was done in 2016, we recruited 1020 women aging 18-49 years. Three methods were applied to estimate the abortion prevalence: direct question, network scale-up (NSU), and single sample count (SSC). In the direct method, to guarantee anonymity, data were collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire. In other methods, data were collected through gender-matched street-based interviews.
resultsThe annual rate of abortion estimated by direct and NSU methods were 2 respectively 9 (10 intentional, 4 therapeutic and 15 spontaneous) and 23 (9 intentional, 3 therapeutic, and 11 spontaneous) per 1000 women aging 18- 49 years. The annual rate of intentional abortion estimated based on SSC method was higher (15 per 1000) women than other methods.
conclusionThe present estimates are higher than previously reported ones. The results of three methods more or less supported each other confirming the internal validity of our estimates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.