ArticleReproductive health2020
Understanding sexual and reproductive health needs of young women living in Zika affected regions: a qualitative study in northeastern Brazil.
Article in Reproductive health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Women's knowledge about Intrauterine Device and user satisfaction in Brazil: a systematic review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Pooled it
- Silent Scars in the Water-Energy-Food Nexus: How Resource Insecurity Shapes Women's Mental and Reproductive Health in South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Article
- Neurodevelopment in Children Exposed to ZikaFrontiers in genetics · 2022Review
- Zika virus public health crisis and the perpetuation of gender inequality in Brazil.Reproductive health · 2021Article
- Abortion in the times of Zika: the perspective of women in two Brazilian municipalities.Papeles de poblacion · 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2016, the World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern due to Zika's association with microcephaly and other neurological disorders. Brazil was the epicenter of this epidemic and the most affected region has the lowest Human Development Index and the highest rates of adolescent pregnancy. Despite the end of the epidemic, Brazil continues to be the epicenter of Zika illness. This study examined the barriers faced by young women who seek sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care services living in affected areas and their attitudes towards SRH needs and the available services.
methodsIndividual semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 young women, aged 14-24 years in three Zika affected municipalities in the Brazilian Northeast. This qualitative research used thematic analysis for data analysis.
resultsAlmost half (n = 10) of the participants had their first pregnancy during adolescence (from 12 to 19), all of which were unintended. Lack of information and barriers to access family planning were found to contribute to the unmet need for contraception. Participants reported knowledge gaps about contraception. Zika was not considered a health concern and participants were unaware of the possibility of Zika's sexual transmission.
conclusionsThe young women's knowledge and attitudes towards their SRH needs highlight the barriers to access care. It also implies that comprehensive, biopsychosocial and political, understanding is necessary in order to adequately provide SRH to this population and meet their needs. The government should place women at the center of any public health response to an emergency affecting women of reproductive age and focus on improving access to information and family planning services in a culturally and age appropriate manner.
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.