Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35920612›Full record

ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2022

Impacts of COVID-19 on contraceptive and abortion services in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

Chelsea B Polis, Ann Biddlecom, Susheela Singh, Boniface Ayanbekongshie Ushie, Lori Rosman, Abdulmumin Saad

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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.

Chelsea B PolisPrincipal Research Scientist, Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1031-7074
Ann BiddlecomDirector, International Research, Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY, USA. Correspondence: abiddlecom@guttmacher.org; abiddlecom@gmail.com; @annbiddlecom.ORCID 0000-0001-9385-2592
Susheela SinghDistinguished Scholar and Vice President, Global Science and Policy Integration, Guttmacher Institute, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9108-6206
Boniface Ayanbekongshie UshieResearch Scientist, Sexual Reproductive Maternal Newborn Child and Adolescent Health, African Population and Health Research Center, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-6579-6327
Lori RosmanLead Informationist, Welch Medical Library, School of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6935-1672
Abdulmumin SaadDeputy Editor-in-Chief, Global Health: Science and Practice Journal, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8367-2835

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionate effects on people living in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), exacerbating weak health systems. We conducted a scoping review to identify, map, and synthesise studies in LMICs that measured the impact of COVID-19 on demand for, provision of, and access to contraceptive and abortion-related services, and reproductive outcomes of these impacts. Using a pre-established protocol, we searched bibliographic databases (December 2019-February 2021) and key grey literature sources (December 2019-April 2021). Of 71 studies included, the majority (61%) were not peer-reviewed, and 42% were based in Africa, 35% in Asia, 17% were multi-region, and 6% were in Latin America and the Caribbean. Most studies were based on data through June 2020. The magnitude of contraceptive service-related impacts varied widely across 55 studies (24 of which also included information on abortion). Nearly all studies assessing changes over time to contraceptive service provision noted declines of varying magnitude, but severe disruptions were relatively uncommon or of limited duration. Twenty-six studies addressed the impacts of COVID-19 on abortion and postabortion care (PAC). Overall, studies found increases in demand, reductions in provision and increases in barriers to accessing these services. The use of abortion services declined, but the use of PAC was more mixed with some studies finding increases compared to pre-COVID-19 levels. The impacts of COVID-19 varied substantially, including the country context, health service, and population studied. Continued monitoring is needed to assess impacts on these key health services, as the COVID-19 pandemic evolves.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedCOVID-19Contraceptive AgentsDeveloping CountriesFemaleHumansPandemicsPregnancyContraceptive AgentsabortioncontraceptionCOVID-19low- and middle-income countriespostabortion carescoping reviewsexual and reproductive health

Identifiers

PMID35920612
PMCPMC9351554

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.