ArticleBMC public health2025
Identifying women with poor experience of post-abortion care: a cross-sectional study in two African hospitals in humanitarian settings.
Article in BMC public 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHigh quality post-abortion care (PAC) is essential to reducing abortion-related morbidity and mortality. However, the experience of receiving PAC, a key component of care quality, remains understudied in humanitarian settings. We assessed the experience of PAC in two hospitals supported by an international organization in Jigawa State (Nigeria) and Bangui (Central African Republic, CAR) and identified characteristics associated with poor experience of PAC.
methodsWe analyzed data from two components of a multi-methods cross-sectional study: a prospective medical records review and a survey of women hospitalized for abortion complications in the Nigerian (n = 360) and CAR (n = 362) hospitals. We measured women’s experience of PAC with two questions related to communication with health providers (explanations received and ability to ask questions) and five questions related to respect and preservation of dignity (privacy, waiting times, health provider’s kindness, painkillers provision and overall care assessment). Association between women’s characteristics and the two communication outcomes were investigated using multivariate logistic regressions. A latent variable was constructed using the five respect and dignity questions and its association with women’s characteristics was assessed using multivariate linear regression.
resultsNearly 51% in Nigeria hospital and 41% in CAR hospital reported receiving no explanation of their care, and over 80% in both hospitals said they felt unable to ask questions during examination and treatment. Less than 20% of women in Nigeria reported a lack of respect and preservation of their dignity. In CAR, almost 63% of women said that their privacy was not always respected during the physical examination and 38% said waiting times were long or very long before seeing a health provider. We found associations between low education level and poor experience of communication in both settings. Being adolescent was associated with one poor communication outcome in CAR and poor experience of respect and preservation of dignity in Nigeria.
conclusionA non-negligible proportion of PAC patients faced poor communication and mixed experiences of respect, with poorer experiences in women with low education and adolescents. Socio-demographic inequalities in PAC experiences must not be overlooked in humanitarian settings, and further research is critical to identify and support the most vulnerable women.
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.