ArticleContraception2025
Understanding intimate partner reproductive coercion: A qualitative assessment responding to methodologic demands of health equity research.
Article in Contraception, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to generate formative data for conceptualization of intimate partner reproductive coercion (RC) as part of a health equity approach to antiviolence research and clinical interventions. STUDY
designThis qualitative study recruited 11 RC researchers from a national cohort and 20 community members from a state-wide research panel to participate in individual semistructured interviews or videoconferencing community discussions. We analyzed data using modified grounded theory and the Framework Method.
resultsParticipants confirmed that RC lacks a consensus definition, and its historical conceptualization as a pregnancy-promoting phenomenon excludes important aspects of individuals' experience. Intimate partner violence provides structure for understanding RC through mutual grounding in the constructs of power and control; this framework facilitates academic, clinical, and community understanding of RC. Through the framing in power and control, rather than partner intent regarding reproductive outcomes, RC conceptualization is enhanced through a focus on individual distress, report of interference in sexual and reproductive health goals, and means of resistance to partner abuse. Finally, RC is one of a multitude of intersecting oppressions relevant to clinical and research spaces.
conclusionsAssessing the potentially significant role of RC in sexual and reproductive health research and clinical care requires rigorous evaluations of those with lived and investigational experience. RC researchers and community members offer insights that can guide meaningful efforts to address RC, its relevance to reproductive and sexual health, and support health equity. IMPLICATIONS: Reproductive coercion is a common form of violence that disrupts sexual and reproductive health with growing recognition but limited formal conceptualization. These formative data encourage broader conceptualization of this phenomenon, providing the substrate for the development of a more comprehensive measurement instrument.
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.