Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37457269›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Main barriers to services linked to voluntary pregnancy termination on three grounds in Chile.

Adela Montero, Mirliana Ramirez-Pereira, Paz Robledo, Lidia Casas, Lieta Vivaldi, Daniela González

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Adela MonteroFaculty of Medicine, Center for Reproductive Medicine and Integral Development of Adolescence, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Mirliana Ramirez-PereiraDepartment of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Paz RobledoMedium Care Unit, Pediatrics and Pediatric Surgery Service, Hospital La Florida, Dr. Eloisa Díaz., Santiago, Chile.
Lidia CasasFaculty of Law, Center for Human Rights, Diego Portales University, Santiago, Chile.
Lieta VivaldiDepartment of Law Sciences, Faculty of Law, Alberto Hurtado University, Santiago, Chile.
Daniela GonzálezFaculty of Medicine, Center for Reproductive Medicine and Integral Development of Adolescence, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: After decades of absolute criminalization, on September 14, 2017, Chile decriminalized voluntary termination of pregnancy (VTP) when there is a life risk to the pregnant woman, lethal incompatibility of the embryo or fetus of genetic or chromosomal nature, and pregnancy due to rape. The implementation of the law reveals multiple barriers hindering access to the services provided by the law. Objectives: To identify and analyze, using the Tanahashi Model, the main barriers to the implementation of law 21,030 in public health institutions. This article contributes to the follow-up of this public policy, making visible the obstacles that violate women's rights of women to have dignified access to abortion and that affect the quality of health care in Chile. Material and method: Qualitative design, following the postpositivist paradigm. The sample consisted of relevant actors directly related to pregnancy termination. Snowball sampling and semi-structured interviews were used. Grounded theory was used through inductive coding, originating categories regrouped into meta-categories following Tanahashi's model. The rigor criteria of transferability, dependability, credibility, authenticity, and epistemological theoretical adequacy were used. The identity of the participants and the confidentiality of the information were protected. Results: From January 2021 to October 2022, 62 interviews were conducted with 20 members of the psychosocial support team; 18 managers; 17 members of the biomedical health team; 4 participants from of civil society, and three women users. The main obstacles correspond to availability barriers, accessibility barriers, acceptability barriers, contact barriers, and effectiveness barriers. Conclusions: Barriers to access abortion under three grounds violate the exercise of women's sexual and reproductive rights. It is urgent to carry out actions of control and follow-up of this public policy to the corresponding entities.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedHealth Services AccessibilityAttitude of Health PersonnelChileFemaleHumansPregnancyWomen's Rightsabortionbarriers in healthcareconscientious objectionhealth policiesobstetric violencesexual and reproductive rightsstigma

Identifiers

PMID37457269
PMCPMC10338916

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.