ArticlePloS one2023
Scoping review of qualitative studies investigating reproductive health knowledge, attitudes, and practices among men and women across Rwanda.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of an Electronic Course of Sexual Health Education for Young Adults (18-35 Years): An Exploratory Sequential Mixed-Methods Study Protocol.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Reproductive Autonomy in Fertility Research in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Scoping Review.Studies in family planning · 2025Article
- A scoping review of qualitative studies on sexual and reproductive health and rights in Uganda: Exploring factors at multiple levels.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch efforts in Rwanda to improve sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are increasing; however, comprehensive literature reviews on SRHR are limited. This scoping review examines individual and contextual factors shaping knowledge, attitudes, and practices in the domains of: 1) family planning, 2) abortion care, and 3) other SRHR in Rwanda. Recognizing that individual, community, and societal factors influence RH, this review is guided by Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory.
methodsEligible studies were conducted in Rwanda, included males and/or females of any age, and were published within the past 20 years. Studies reporting views of only healthcare or other professionals were excluded.
resultsThirty-six studies were included. The majority addressed individual and contextual considerations. At the individual level, studies explored knowledge about SRHR problems while at the interpersonal level, the support and attitudes of men and community members for adolescent SRHR were investigated. In terms of healthcare organization, maternal health practices, increased access to family planning programs, and the need for sexually transmitted infection programs was explored. At the social and cultural level, researchers investigated beliefs and traditional gender roles. Regarding public health policy, studies mentioned promoting and increasing funding for SRHR and reducing gender inequities.
conclusionOur findings can inform SRHR research programs, public health campaigns, and policy advances in Rwanda.
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.