ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026
Beyond the 72 h window: operationalizing safe abortion as essential care for sexual violence survivors in humanitarian settings.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), sexual violence is systematically employed as a weapon of war, precipitating a profound reproductive health crisis. Current clinical protocols prioritize intervention within a 72-hour window; however, pervasive insecurity, displacement, and geographic barriers frequently prevent survivors from accessing care within this timeframe. This broken link in the referral chain effectively denies survivors safe abortion services, resulting in forced pregnancies and secondary institutional trauma. This review evaluates the DRC's humanitarian response by analyzing the integration of the Minimum Initial Service Package (MISP) against evolving domestic legislation, specifically the 2018 gazetting of the Maputo Protocol and the 2020 National Comprehensive Abortion Care Guidelines. Despite a supreme legal mandate under Article 14 of the Maputo Protocol authorizing safe abortion for survivors, implementation is obstructed by provider stigma, the misuse of conscientious objection, and a hierarchy of services that prioritizes physical trauma repair over reproductive autonomy. Clinical pathways for cases presenting beyond the 72-hour emergency window remain poorly operationalized. To bridge the gap between legal rights and clinical reality, the DRC must transition toward a Comprehensive Clinical Management model. This requires institutionalizing task-sharing with midwives and integrating the Addressing Reproductive Coercion in Health Settings (ARCHES) framework to manage reproductive violence beyond the emergency phase. Safe abortion must be repositioned as an essential, non-optional component of post-rape care. True recovery depends on aligning clinical practice with international human rights standards, ensuring reproductive self-determination is upheld amidst protracted crisis and systemic instability.
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.