ArticlePloS one2021
Protocol for a scoping review of research on abortion in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telehealth abortion services via Women on Web in Kenya (2013-2019): a descriptive analysis of the characteristics and motivations of the care seekers.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUnsafe abortion is a leading cause of maternal mortality, and access to safe abortion services remains a public health priority in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). A considerable amount of abortion research exists in the region; however, the spread of existing evidence is uneven such that some countries have an acute shortage of data with others over-researched. The imbalance reflects the complexities in prioritization among researchers, academics, and funders, and undeniably impedes effective policy and advocacy efforts. This scoping review aims to identify and map the landscape of abortion research in SSA, summarize existing knowledge, and pinpoint significant gaps, both substantive and geographic, requiring further investigation. This review will provide direction for future research, investments, and offer guidance for policy and programming on safe abortion. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe utilize the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodology for conducting scoping reviews. We will perform the search for articles in 8 electronic databases (i.e., PubMed, AJOL, Science Direct, SCOPUS, HINARI, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, and WHO Regional Databases). We will include studies written in English or French language, produced or published between January 1, 2011, and July 31, 2021, and pertain directly to the subject of abortion in SSA. Using a tailored extraction frame, we will extract relevant information from publications that meet the inclusion criteria. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis in response to key review questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required, as no primary data will be collected. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.
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.