Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36447797›Full record

ArticlePapeles de poblacion2021

Abortion in the times of Zika: the perspective of women in two Brazilian municipalities.

Raquel Zanatta-Coutinho, Andréa Branco-Simão

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Papeles de poblacion, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Raquel Zanatta-CoutinhoDepartamento de Demografia e Centro de Desenvolvimento e Planejamento Regional (Cedeplar), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Andréa Branco-SimãoDepartamento de Demografia e Centro de Desenvolvimento e Planejamento Regional (Cedeplar), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

Population Research CenterR24HD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI HAYWARD, MARK D. · 2002 to 2016
$8.4M
Reproductive Responses to the Zika Virus Epidemic in BrazilR01HD091257 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Leticia J Marteleto · 2018 to 2026
$5.8M
Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI MARK D. HAYWARD · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD091257NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD042849
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Brazil, abortion is considered a crime under the Criminal Code since 1940. After the Zika virus epidemic (2015-2017) and the consequent appearance of microcephaly in newborns struck South America, the debate on the decriminalization of abortion in the Brazilian society was reignited. Using data obtained from focus groups comprising women of reproductive age across different socioeconomic strata and two Brazilian cities, we investigated the perceptions of the participants on abortion, especially its use during the Zika epidemic. Although legally criminalized, abortion is prevalent among women, as a way to fulfill their reproductive desire. Criminalization puts the health and lives of women at risk, particularly those with less economic and cultural capital. We also discover the role of friends in women's decision to utilize the procedure. The strong asymmetry of power between men and women contributes to the greater vulnerability of women. The results suggest an urgent need to review the legislation on abortion concerning its criminalization and the option of safer abortion within the scope of the public health service.

Indexed as

AbortionBrazildecriminalizationFocus Groupsunsafe abortionZika vírus

Identifiers

PMID36447797
PMCPMC9703644
OpenAlexW4214482726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.