ArticleBMC women's health2026
Women veterans' experiences of veteran-specific support services: an international scoping review.
Article in BMC women's health, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe growing proportion of women in veteran communities internationally highlights a rising need for veteran support services tailored to their unique experiences. Despite this, support services remain predominantly designed for men, leading to underutilization and dissatisfaction among women veterans. This scoping review aimed to provide a comprehensive international review of the current state of knowledge regarding the experiences of women veterans in accessing and engaging with veteran-specific support services.
methodsThis study followed the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Five databases were searched for papers published from 2000 onwards. Studies reporting on barriers and/or facilitators to access and experiences of engaging with veteran-specific support services reported by women veterans were included. There were no limitations on study methodology or country of origin, and all publications reporting primary research were included.
resultsA total of 117 studies were included in the review. This research originated predominantly from the US (n = 109), with seven UK papers, and one Canadian. Eleven themes were identified across the literature, highlighting gendered barriers and facilitators of accessing veteran-specific support for women. Women veterans report feelings of discomfort, exclusion, and discrimination within veteran services, which are perceived as being set up and designed for men. Women report experiencing stigma in help-seeking compounded by a perception of feminine weakness experienced during military service. Some women didn't want to access services they saw as military-adjacent, due to gendered adverse experiences during military service, including discrimination, harassment, and sexual violence. A lack of identification with the term 'veteran' further hinders women's engagement with veteran-specific services. Enablers of access include care that is sensitive to women's needs, trauma-informed service user-provider relationships, and peer support.
conclusionThe reviewed evidence suggests women experience unique challenges and needs in accessing veteran-specific services. Support services should focus on developing care that is, culturally competent, trauma-informed and sensitive to the needs of women, to address gendered barriers to engagement. More research is needed to confirm these research findings outside of the US context, and incorporating an intersectional lens in future research will be essential for improving the support systems for women veterans internationally.
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.