Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33975533›Full record

ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2021

Permeability of abortion care in the Netherlands: a qualitative analysis of women's experiences, health professional perspectives, and the internet resource of Women on Web.

Lianne Holten, Eva de Goeij, Gunilla Kleiverda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. [Dimensions of person-centeredness in abortion services-selected results of the CarePreg study].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Dutch GPs' views on prescribing mifepristone and misoprostol: a mixed-methods study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Lianne HoltenResearcher, Women on Waves, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Eva de GoeijIndependent scholar, Dutch Humanist Association (Humanistich Verbond), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Gunilla KleiverdaConsultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite a relatively permissive abortion law, women in the Netherlands encounter difficulties in accessing abortion care. Little is known about their experiences. This study explores women's experiences with (online) abortion services and relevant health professionals' experiences delivering care, with the goal of identifying key barriers encountered by abortion-seekers in the Netherlands. An exploratory qualitative research design with a constructivist approach and an abbreviated grounded theory method was used. Interviews with 20 women who had had an abortion and 14 health professionals who provide abortion care, and 200 emails of women seeking abortion care through the non-governmental organisation Women on Web, were coded inductively and deductively (using the Candidacy Framework) thereby generating themes. Abortion-seekers faced barriers including: (i) burden of taboo, (ii) vulnerability (emotional, financial, and social), (iii) health professional evaluation and (iv) disempowerment and distress. The overarching theme was women's lack of autonomy in access to abortion care. The key barriers to abortion access in the Netherlands are the institutionalisation of taboo in abortion law and care, complex candidacy regulations, lack of permeability for certain marginalised groups, and women's inability to speak openly about abortion. To increase the permeability of abortion care, and thereby women's autonomy, legislators and policy-makers must trust women to make their own reproductive decisions and avoid actions that stigmatise abortion and hinder access to care, while actively developing systemic support for vulnerable groups.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedHealth Services AccessibilityFemaleHumansInternetNetherlandsPermeabilityPregnancyabortioncandidacyhealth care accesspermeabilityreproductive healthtaboovulnerable populations

Identifiers

PMID33975533
PMCPMC8118432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.