ArticleSexual and reproductive health matters2025
"
Article in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Framework conditions for informed decision-making and interdisciplinary collaboration in abortion care-perspectives of counselling professionals].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026Article
- Barriers to abortion care for recently arrived migrants in Germany.Journal of migration and 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Access to abortion is recognised as a key component of the right to healthcare. Yet, to this day, abortion in Germany without medical or criminal indication is illegal and treated under the penal code, although not punished if taking place in the first 12 gestational weeks and following a formalised process including mandatory counselling. Our study aimed to critically examine the pathway to abortion necessitated by the current criminalising legal framework in Germany. We conducted a qualitative study between November 2023 and July 2024, using 17 interviews to capture views of abortion-related service providers on barriers and enablers to abortion in Berlin and Brandenburg, applying a thematic analysis approach using MaxQDA. Our findings point to multiple individual barriers to abortion along the pathway, whose complexity itself presents a structural barrier. Even providers were sometimes insecure about how parts of the process worked and what they were or were not allowed to do. We identified a nine-step series of actions which most individuals seeking abortion must undergo to end an unwanted pregnancy, involving multiple health service visits and the repeated need to communicate their personal situation to different authorities. Our study illustrates that the pathway to abortion in Germany produces a state-induced barrier to a fundamental reproductive health service, and in this respect can be viewed as a form of structural violence against pregnant individuals in a critically decisive situation. Our findings support existing recommendations to decriminalise abortion, which would align Germany´s abortion policy with its international commitments and with international best practices as outlined by WHO.
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.