ArticleRevista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia2023
[Recurrent voluntary termination of pregnancy. Prevalence study and exploration of associated factors. Antioquia, Colombia, 2015 – 2021].
Article in Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia, 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.
- Assessment of quality of life in patients with Müllerian anomalies at a referral center in Colombia.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor regarding "Recurrent voluntary termination of pregnancy. Prevalence study and exploration of associated factors. Antioquia, Colombia, 2015 – 2021"Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2024Article
- A global scoping review of the circumstances of care seeking for abortion later in pregnancy.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the prevalence of recurrent voluntary termination of pregnancy (VTP) and to explore associated factors. Materials and methods: Descriptive, cross-sectional cohort study which included women seen between 2015 and 2021 in five sites of an institution located in the Department of Antioquia which promotes sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care in Colombia. Measured variables included sociodemographics, SRH, recurrent performance of VTP, type of procedure used in the first VTP and contraception method selected afterwards. The prevalence of global and yearly recurrent abortion period is presented. Associated factors were explored using a multivariate analysis. The research committee of the institution approved the study. Results: In total, 20,423 women were included. The prevalence of recurrent VTP was 4.07% (n = 831) during the entire period, ranging between 2.3 and 6% over the 7 years. The most commonly used method for recurrent VTP was pharmacological induction (48.50%). After the first VTP, 69.81% of women used contraceptive methods classified as “very effective” according to the World Health Organization. The risk factors identified as being associated with recurrent VTP included being part of the state-subsidized health insurance system (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.35; 95 % CI:1.05-1.72) and having had two or more pregnancies (aOR = 1.23; 95% CI: 1.06 - 1.44). Protective factors were identified and included out-of-pocket payment for VTP service (aOR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61-0.82), a history of late VTP (aOR = 0.30; 95% CI: 0.11-0.81), and the selection of a subdermal implant for contraception following the first abortion (sOR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.49 – 0.83). Conclusions: It is possible that the prevalence of recurrent VTP is increasing. Prospective studies are required in order to determine whether there is a growing trend and to verify potential association hypotheses derived from this work.
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.