ArticleBMJ open2022
Disruptions to the procurement of medical abortion medicines during COVID-19: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis scoping review aimed to systematically search, retrieve and map the extent and characteristics of available literature on the evidenced disruptions to medical abortion (MA) medicine procurement caused by the COVID-19 outbreak.
designScoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's methodology and Levac DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, PMC, Science Direct, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched from January 2020 to April 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included articles in English that: (1) contained information on MA medicines; (2) included descriptions of procurement disruptions, including those with examples, characteristics and/or statistics; (3) documented events during the COVID-19 pandemic; and (4) presented primary data. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently screened search results, performed a full-text review of preliminarily included articles and completed data extraction in a standard Excel spreadsheet. Extracted data from was compared for validation and synthesised qualitatively.
resultsThe two articles included are unpublished grey literature demonstrating evidence of short-lived disruptions in sexual and reproductive health commodity procurement, including MA medicines, in sub-Saharan Africa during the early months of the pandemic. Findings from the two included grey literature articles show that in sub-Saharan contexts, emergency preparedness, stockpiling, adaptations and flexibility of key actors, including donors, alleviated COVID-19 disruptions allowing for resumption of services within weeks.
conclusionThere is a need for increased empirical evidence of MA procurement challenges to understand which barriers to MA procurement may persist and impact continuity of supply while others can fuel resilience and preparedness efforts at the country and subregional levels. The lack of evidence from social marketing organisations and their networks is a significant gap as these actors constitute a vital artery in the distribution of MA commodities in low-income and middle-income countries.
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.