Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34294057›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2021

Women's decision-making power in a context of free reproductive healthcare and family planning in rural Burkina Faso.

Camille Beaujoin, Alice Bila, Frank Bicaba, Véronique Plouffe, Abel Bicaba, Thomas Druetz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  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
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Camille BeaujoinSchool of Public Health, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada. camille.beaujoin@umontreal.ca.
Alice BilaSociété d'Études et de Recherche en Santé Publique (SERSAP), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Frank BicabaSociété d'Études et de Recherche en Santé Publique (SERSAP), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Véronique PlouffeIndependent Consultant, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Abel BicabaSociété d'Études et de Recherche en Santé Publique (SERSAP), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Thomas DruetzSchool of Public Health, University of Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2016, the national user fee exemption policy for women and children under five was introduced in Burkina Faso. It covers most reproductive healthcare services for women including prenatal care, delivery, and postnatal care. In subsequent years, the policy was gradually extended to include family planning. While studies have shown that user fee abolition policies increase visits to health centers and improve access to reproductive healthcare and family planning, there are also indications that other barriers remain, notably women's lack of decision-making power. The objective of the study is to investigate women's decision-making power regarding access to reproductive health and family planning in a context of free healthcare in rural Burkina Faso.

methodsA descriptive qualitative study was carried out in rural areas of the Cascades and Center-West regions. Qualitative data were collected using individual semi-structured interviews (n = 20 participants) and focus groups (n = 15 participants) with Burkinabe women of childbearing age, their husbands, and key informants in the community. Data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

resultsA conceptual framework describing women's participation in the decision-making process was built from the analysis. Results show that the user fee exemption policy contributes to improving access to reproductive care and family planning by facilitating the negotiation processes between women and their families within households. However, social norms and gender inequalities still limit women's decision-making power.

conclusionIn light of these results, courses of action that go beyond the user fee exemption policy should be considered to improve women's decision-making power in matters of health, particularly with regard to family planning. Interventions that involve men and community members may be necessary to challenge the social norms, which act as determinants of women's health and empowerment.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareFamily Planning ServicesBurkina FasoChildFemaleHumansMalePregnancyReproductive HealthRural PopulationBurkina FasoDecision-making powerFamily planningNational user fee exemption policyReproductive health

Identifiers

PMID34294057
PMCPMC8296726

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.