ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025
Incidence and safety of abortion in two humanitarian settings in Uganda and Kenya: a respondent-driven sampling study.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Post-abortion contraceptive uptake among women seeking care for incomplete or induced abortions in Northern Ethiopia: a facility-based cross-sectional study in a humanitarian setting.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Access to abortion is a fundamental human right. The need for abortion services is amplified in complex humanitarian emergencies. However, most humanitarian agencies do not provide abortion services. There is a lack of data on the direct experiences of abortion of those living in displacement. This study aimed to describe abortion practices, safety, and incidence in two refugee settings. Methods: Between March and October 2022, we surveyed 1201 women and girls with recent abortion experiences (past 5 years) from Bidibidi Refugee Settlement, Uganda, and Kakuma Refugee Camp, Kenya, using respondent-driven sampling (RDS). Participants completed an interviewer-administered survey. Population-based estimates of abortion experiences were weighted using the RDS-II estimator to account for the sampling design. We used the sequential sampling population size estimation method to estimate annual abortion incidence. We also conducted a health facility assessment of 27 facilities (16 in Bidibidi, 11 in Kakuma) to describe the availability of facility-based abortion services in these communities. Findings: Among those with an abortion in the past 5 years, the most common methods of abortion were traditional herbs (81% in Bidibidi, 45% in Kakuma) and non-medication abortion pharmaceuticals such as painkillers and antimalarials. Few participants reported using WHO-recommended methods of abortion (mifepristone in combination with misoprostol, misoprostol alone, or manual vacuum aspiration). Self-reported morbidity was high. Nearly a quarter reported avoiding seeking post-abortion care. The estimated annual abortion rate was 52 per 1000 in Bidibidi (95% simulation interval 20-106) and 55 per 1000 in Kakuma (95% simulation interval 19-119). Only 5 of 27 health facilities (1 of 16 in Bidibidi, 4 of 11 in Kakuma) reported providing safe abortion services. 15 of 16 in Bidibidi and 9 of 11 in Kakuma reported providing post-abortion care. Interpretation: Refugees in these two contexts have little access to WHO-recommended methods of abortion, and the need for safe abortion services is high. Funding: This study was funded by Elrha's Research for Health in Humanitarian Crises (R2HC) Programme. Elrha aims to improve health outcomes by strengthening the evidence base for public health interventions in humanitarian crises. R2HC is funded by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office of the United Kingdom, Wellcome Trust, and the UK National Institute for Health Research.
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.