ArticleHeliyon2024
Women's access to family planning and experiences of reproductive coercion during the COVID-19 lockdown in two districts of Uganda.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reproductive coercion and violence against women with unplanned pregnancies in Turkiye.Archives of women's mental health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: In March 2020, Uganda enforced country-wide restrictions to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2, categorizing some health services, including family planning (FP), as non-essential. Globally, similar COVID-19 restrictions have been associated with increased vulnerability to reproductive coercion (RC) among women, due to changes in FP service availability and restricted access by partners. This study aims to investigate these dynamics in Uganda, specifically examining the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on women's access to FP, their experiences of RC, and the relationship between RC and intimate partner violence (IPV). Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from 960 women participating in the AMBSO Population Health Surveillance Study (APHS) between August 2020 and March 2021 across Wakiso (N = 164) and Hoima (N = 796) districts in Uganda. Our analysis focused on women who were sexually active in the past month, using bivariate analyses to explore the associations between RC and recent experiences of sexual, physical, and verbal IPV. Findings: The most commonly reported FP methods were injectables (36.8 %) and implants (16 %). Despite the COVID-19 lockdown, less than one percent of participants reported an inability to access their preferred FP method. Notably, 3 % of the women experienced RC in the past 12 months. There was a significant association between RC and sexual IPV (p < 0.0001), as well as physical IPV (p < 0.0001). Instances of verbal IPV were observed to have tripled during the lockdown period. Interpretation: An increase in verbal IPV was found among women during the COVID-19 lockdown. Additionally, a notable association emerged between other forms of IPV and an increased risk of RC. Despite the lockdown, access to FP remained high, which could be attributed to the prevalent use of long-acting FP methods.
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.