Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38911288›Full record

ArticleSSM. Qualitative research in health2024

A qualitative exploration of reproductive coercion experiences and perceptions in four geo-culturally diverse sub-Saharan African settings.

Haley L Thomas, Suzanne O Bell, Celia Karp, Elizabeth Omoluabi, Simon P S Kibira, Frederick Makumbi, Hadiza Galadanci, Solomon Shiferaw, Assefa Seme, Caroline Moreau and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SSM. Qualitative research in health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

11 authors.

Haley L ThomasDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Suzanne O BellDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Celia KarpDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Elizabeth OmoluabiUniversity of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
Simon P S KibiraMakerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Frederick MakumbiMakerere University School of Public Health, Kampala, Uganda.
Hadiza GaladanciCenter for Advanced Medical Research and Training, Bayero University Kano, Nigeria.
Solomon ShiferawDepartment of Reproductive Health and Health Service Management, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
Assefa SemeDepartment of Reproductive Health and Health Service Management, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.
Caroline MoreauDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Shannon N WoodDepartment of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reproductive coercion (RC) is any intentional behavior that interferes with another's reproductive decision-making or pregnancy outcome. This study aims to qualitatively examine RC experiences and perceptions among women and men in Ethiopia, Nigeria (Kano and Anambra States), and Uganda. This is a secondary analysis utilizing qualitative data from the Women's and Girls' Empowerment in Sexual and Reproductive Health study. Across sites, focus group discussions (38 groups; n=320 participants) and in-depth interviews (n=120) were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Transcripts were loaded into Atlas.ti, and quotes describing experiences of reproductive control or abuse were coded as "reproductive coercion." RC quotes were input into a matrix for thematic analysis. Emergent RC themes included indirect reproductive pressures, direct family planning interference, concurrent experiences of violence, and responses to RC. Indirect reproductive pressures included tactics to both promote and prevent pregnancy, while direct interference centered on pregnancy promotion. Women who were not compliant with their partners' reproductive demands were often subjected to violence from multiple actors (i.e., parents, in-laws, community members) in addition to their partners. Despite concurrent forms of violence, women across sites resisted RC by using contraceptives covertly, choosing to abort, or leaving their abusive partnerships. Women and men across sites indicated that men were highly influential in fertility. RC behaviors were a mechanism of control over desired reproductive outcomes, which were often rooted in perceptions of childbearing as social status. Findings indicate a need for more nuanced community interventions targeting social norms, as well as improved RC screening and response within health services.

Indexed as

ContraceptionCouplesQualitative researchReproductive coercionReproductive healthSub-Saharan Africa

Identifiers

PMID38911288
PMCPMC11190838

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.