Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40124829›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine

A Cross-Sectional Epidemiological Study of Abortions in a Rural Area of Delhi.

Priyanka Yadav, Gajendra S Meena, Rajesh Kumar, Nandini Sharma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Priyanka YadavCommunity Medicine, AIIMS Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.
Gajendra S MeenaCommunity Medicine, MAMC, New Delhi, India.
Rajesh KumarCommunity Medicine, MAMC, New Delhi, India.
Nandini SharmaCommunity Medicine, MAMC, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Abortions in India are increasing despite the laws to legalize them. Many abortions are conducted through unsafe practices and are underreported. To determine the prevalence of abortions in women of a reproductive age group in a rural area of Delhi and to determine associated factors. Methodology: A cross-sectional study was conducted among married women in the reproductive age group residing in Barwala village, Delhi/NCR. An interview schedule was used to interview 315 women, and information was obtained for socio-demography, use of contraceptives, medical history, and history of abortions. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used for analyzing the association of abortions with other variables. Results: Of all 315 women, 47% had a history of one or more abortions. Of all pregnancies (n = 953), 25.6% ended in abortions (n = 244). Of the total number of abortions reported, 60.7% (n = 148) were induced, while 39.3% (n = 96) were spontaneous. Of induced abortions, only 35% were safe, while 65% were unsafe abortions. Age of mother, age at marriage, history of contraception use, and gender of first child were significantly associated with abortions. However, no significant association was found with socio-economic status, education, and occupation of women and their spouses. Only 1.3% women knew that abortions are legal in India. Conclusion: A high proportion of women are going for induced abortions, of which a greater proportion is that of unsafe abortions. There is also lack of knowledge about the legalisation of abortions in India.

Indexed as

Abortioncontraceptive usesafe abortionsunsafe abortions

Identifiers

PMID40124829
PMCPMC11927870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.