Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39394094›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2024

Barriers and facilitators to women's access to sexual and reproductive health services in rural Australia: a systematic review.

Sarah M Wood, Laura Alston, Anna Chapman, Jacinta Lenehan, Vincent L Versace

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Heavy Menstrual Bleeding: Experiences and Learnings From Patient Survey.The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Bridging Financial Inclusion and Health Equity in LMICs: Evidence from a Half-Century of Bibliometric Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Sarah M WoodDeakin Rural Health, Deakin University, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Warrnambool Campus, PO Box 423, Warrnambool, VIC, 3280, Australia. woodsar@deakin.edu.au.
Laura AlstonDeakin Rural Health, Deakin University, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Warrnambool Campus, PO Box 423, Warrnambool, VIC, 3280, Australia.
Anna ChapmanInstitute for Health Transformation, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Jacinta LenehanWomen's Health and Wellbeing Barwon South West, Warrnambool, VIC, Australia.
Vincent L VersaceDeakin Rural Health, Deakin University, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health, Warrnambool Campus, PO Box 423, Warrnambool, VIC, 3280, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services in rural Australia presents complex challenges that negatively impact women's health and exacerbate health inequities across the life course. This systematic review synthesises evidence on the barriers and facilitators to women's access to SRH services in rural Australia, considering both supply and demand dimensions.

methodsWe systematically searched peer-reviewed literature published between 2013 and 2023. Search terms were derived from three major topics: (1) women living in rural Australia; (2) spatial or aspatial access to SRH services; and (3) barriers or facilitators. We adopted the "best fit" approach to framework synthesis using the patient-centred access to healthcare model.

resultsDatabase searches retrieved 1,024 unique records, with 50 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies analysed access to primary care services (n = 29; 58%), followed by hospital services (n = 14; 28%), health promotion and prevention (n = 5; 10%), and specialist care (n = 2; 4%). The type of care accessed was mostly maternity care (n = 21; 42%), followed by abortion services (n = 11; 22%), screening and testing (n = 8; 16%), other women's health services (n = 6; 12%), and family planning (n = 4; 8%). There were numerous barriers and facilitators in access from supply and demand dimensions. Supply barriers included fragmented healthcare pathways, negative provider attitudes, limited availability of services and providers, and high costs. Demand barriers encompassed limited awareness, travel challenges, and financial burdens. Supply facilitators included health system improvements, inclusive practices, enhanced local services, and patient-centred care. Demand facilitators involved knowledge and awareness, care preferences, and telehealth accessibility.

conclusionThis review highlights the urgent need for targeted interventions to address SRH service access disparities in rural Australia. Understanding the barriers and facilitators women face in accessing SRH services within the rural context is necessary to develop comprehensive healthcare policies and interventions informed by a nuanced understanding of rural women's diverse needs.

Indexed as

Health Services AccessibilityReproductive Health ServicesAustraliaFemaleHumansRural Health ServicesRural PopulationAccessBarriers and facilitatorsDelivery of healthcareHealth equityHealth serviceRural healthSexual and reproductive healthSystematic reviewWomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID39394094
PMCPMC11468210

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.