Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31455621›Full record

ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2019

Postabortion Care in Humanitarian Emergencies: Improving Treatment and Reducing Recurrence.

Meghan Gallagher, Catherine Morris, Mariam Aldogani, Claire Eldred, Abdikani Hirsi Shire, Emily Monaghan, Sarah Ashraf, Janet Meyers, Ribka Amsalu

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health, science and practice, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Meghan GallagherSave the Children, Washington, DC, USA. mgallagher@savechildren.org.
Catherine MorrisSave the Children, Washington, DC, USA.
Mariam AldoganiSave the Children, Hodeida, Yemen.
Claire EldredSave the Children, Goma, Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Abdikani Hirsi ShireSave the Children, Puntland, Somalia.
Emily MonaghanSave the Children, London, United Kingdom.
Sarah AshrafSave the Children, Washington, DC, USA.
Janet MeyersSave the Children, Washington, DC, USA.
Ribka AmsaluSave the Children, Washington, DC, USA.
Save the Children · USSave the Children · GBUniversity of Goma · CD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnsafe abortion contributes to maternal mortality worldwide and disproportionately affects the most disadvantaged women and girls; thus, improving the treatment of complications of abortion is essential. Shifting PAC treatment from sharp dilation and curettage (D&C) to the use of aspiration techniques, notably manual vacuum aspiration (MVA), and medical treatment with misoprostol improves health outcomes. Equally critical is ensuring that women have access to voluntary contraception after an abortion to prevent future unintended pregnancies. In humanitarian settings, access to voluntary family planning to disrupt the cycle of unsafe abortion is even more critical because access to quality services cannot be guaranteed due to security risks, migration, and devastation of infrastructure. Save the Children applied a multipronged postabortion care (PAC) approach in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Somalia, and Yemen that focused on capacity building; assurance of supplies and infrastructure; community collaboration and mobilization; and monitoring and evaluation.

methodsProgram-level data were extracted for each of the 3 countries from the inception of their program through 2017. The sources of information included monthly service delivery reports that tracked key PAC indicators as well as qualitative data from evaluations of community mobilization activities.

resultsThe number of PAC clients increased in all countries. In the DRC in 2012, 19% of PAC clients requiring treatment received D&C; in 2017 the percentage was reduced to 3%. In 2013, 25% of all PAC clients in Yemen were treated with D&C; this percentage was reduced to 3% in 2017. The proportion of women choosing contraception after an abortion increased. In 2012, only 42% of all PAC clients in the DRC chose a contraceptive method; by 2017, the proportion had increased to 70%. Somalia had substantial increases in PAC demand, with the percentage of all PAC clients electing contraception increasing from 64% in 2012 to 82% in 2017. In Yemen, where the health system has been constrained due to severe conflict, the percentage of PAC clients choosing voluntary contraception rose from 17% in 2013 to 38% in 2017. Uptake and demand for PAC was mobilized through targeted community outreach in each context.

conclusionThese data demonstrate that providers can effectively shift away from D&C as treatment for PAC and that contraceptive uptake by PAC clients can increase substantially, even in settings where the use of contraception after abortion is often stigmatized.

Indexed as

AftercareCapacity BuildingCommunity ParticipationAbortifacient Agents, NonsteroidalAbortion, InducedDemocratic Republic of the CongoDilatation and CurettageEmergenciesEquipment and SuppliesFamily Planning ServicesFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMisoprostolPregnancyQuality ImprovementAbortifacient Agents, NonsteroidalMisoprostol

Identifiers

PMID31455621
PMCPMC6711619
OpenAlexW2970055137

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.