Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38286965›Full record

ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2024

Rethinking the Definition of Medicalized Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting.

Nina Van Eekert, Hazel Barrett, Samuel Kimani, Irwan Hidayana, Els Leye

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Labiaplasty in Minors: Medicalizing Mutilation?Archives of sexual behavior · 2025
    Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Nina Van EekertThe Research Foundation-Flanders, Brussels, Belgium. nina.vaneekert@uantwerpen.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5508-1018
Hazel BarrettCentre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
Samuel KimaniCoordinating Centre for Abandonment of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting, Nairobi, Kenya.
Irwan HidayanaCenter for Gender and Sexuality Studies, Department of Anthropology, University of Indonesia, Depok City, Indonesia.
Els Leye, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

research foundation flanders 12g3322N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 2015, the international community agreed to end Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) by 2030. However, the target is unlikely to be met as changes in practice, including medicalized female genital mutilation/cutting (mFGM/C), challenge abandonment strategies. This paper critically reviews the current World Health Organization (WHO) definition of mFGM/C to demonstrate that mFGM/C, as currently defined, lacks detail and clarity, and may serve as an obstacle to the collection of credible, reliable, and comparable data relevant to targeted FGM/C prevention policies and programs. The paper argues that it is necessary to initiate a discussion on the revision of the current WHO definition of mFGM/C, where different components (who-how-where-what) should be taken into account. This is argued by discussing different scenarios that compare the current WHO definition of mFGM/C with the actual practice of FGM/C on the ground. The cases discussed within these scenarios are based on existing published research and the research experience of the authors. The scenarios focus on countries where mFGM/C is prevalent among girls under 18 years, using data from Demographic Health Surveys and/or Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, and thus the focus is on the Global South. The paper places its arguments in relation to wider debates concerning female genital cosmetic surgery, male genital circumcision and consent. It calls for more research on these topics to ensure that definitions of FGM/C and mFGM/C reflect the real-world contexts and ensure that the human rights of girls and women are protected.

Indexed as

Circumcision, FemaleCircumcision, MaleAdolescentFemaleHealth SurveysHuman RightsHumansMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesFemale genital mutilation/cuttingFemale genital mutilation/cutting scenariosMedicalized female genital mutilation/cuttingUnited Nations sustainable development goals

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.