ArticleReproductive health2025
Safe spaces enhancing sexual and reproductive health for youth: a scoping review.
Article in Reproductive health, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSafe spaces play a crucial role in providing support for the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) of youth. As young individuals undergo significant physical and emotional changes, they often encounter challenges such as societal taboos and a lack of accessible information related to their SRH needs. This scoping review explores the existing literature on using safe spaces to offer a supportive environment for adolescents SRH to navigate these complexities.
methodsThis review adhered to Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework method. A comprehensive search was conducted across Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Scopus for studies published between January 2013 and December 2023. It focused on youth aged 15 to < 25 years, including primary studies and grey literature in English from diverse global contexts, excluding non-English studies and scoping/systematic reviews. The screening was done using Covidence software by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted and analyzed using descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis to summarize the findings.
resultsSchools emerged as the most common safe spaces (37 studies), effectively increasing condom use, SRH knowledge, and service utilization. Community-based initiatives (e.g., youth clubs and outreach programs) were critical in reducing stigma and fostering positive SRH attitudes. At the same time, digital platforms demonstrated the potential to address high-risk behaviours and unplanned pregnancies. Interventions included educational sessions, resource distribution, counseling, and peer support. While most studies reported positive outcomes, the evidence for long-term efficacy and sustainability was limited.
conclusionSafe spaces hold significant potential to improve youth SRH outcomes by fostering informed decision-making and reducing risky behaviors. However, the effectiveness of interventions should be critically evaluated, with more emphasis on innovative, digital approaches and long-term impact. Tailored, inclusive, and sustainable strategies are essential to address the diverse needs of youth globally.
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.