Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37857548›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Risk factors and health consequences of experiencing reproductive coercion: a scoping review protocol.

Susan Saldanha, Desireé LaGrappe, Jessica R Botfield, Danielle Mazza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Susan SaldanhaDepartment of General Practice, Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia susan.saldanha@monash.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-6699-3688
Desireé LaGrappeJudith Lumley Centre, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Sexual and Reproductive Health for Women in Primary Care (SPHERE), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2921-1157
Jessica R BotfieldDepartment of General Practice, Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Danielle MazzaDepartment of General Practice, Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionReproductive coercion (RC) describes behaviours that interfere with an individual's reproductive autonomy and decision-making. RC can be a form of intimate partner violence and overlaps with other forms of gender-based violence, such as sexual violence. Health settings are well placed to identify and intervene to support patients experiencing RC, however, the lack of conceptual clarity on RC means that health providers are not easily able to identify those at risk of experiencing RC. To facilitate appropriate identification and development of interventions, there is a need to understand the risk factors related to experiencing RC and associated health consequences.

aimTo assess the current scope of evidence in relation to risk factors and health consequences of experiencing RC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Eligible articles for inclusion in the scoping review will be original peer-reviewed literature that describe risk factors and health consequences of any type of RC. Studies on humans published in English since 2010 will be included. The proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI Methodology. This protocol is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Five electronic databases, OVID Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychINFO and Embase, will be searched for relevant literature from 1 January 2010 to 23 January 2023. Two reviewers will individually screen and review articles for eligibility, and conflicts will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be charted and reported using a tool developed for the purpose of this review. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations to relevant stakeholders. Ethical approval is not required as data from publicly available literature sources will be used. Available evidence will be mapped across the breadth of eligible studies to identify associated risk factors and health consequences of RC.

Indexed as

CoercionResearch DesignDatabases, FactualHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicRisk FactorsScoping Reviews as TopicPUBLIC HEALTHReproductive medicineRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID37857548
PMCPMC10603526

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.