SynthesisJournal of health, population, and nutrition2026
Experiences and self-reported outcomes of abortion care in Sub-Saharan countries: a mixed methods systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 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
backgroundAccess to safe abortion remains a public health concern in sub-Saharan countries, where restrictive policies and limited access to quality healthcare contribute to preventable maternal morbidity and mortality related to unsafe abortion. This study synthesised the available evidence on abortion care experiences and self-reported outcomes of people seeking abortion care. And explored the existing tools to assess abortion care experiences and outcomes in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA).
methodsWe searched eight databases: Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Global Health, PsycINFO, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science, to include studies published between 1 January 2010 and 18 October 2025. All original (quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods) studies that focused on induced abortion care and assessed people's experiences and outcomes of abortion care in SSA were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) data extraction tool and critical appraisal checklist were adapted. We undertook narrative synthesis for data analysis. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42023461963.
resultsOf 20,180 records retrieved, 35 were eligible for the final review. Eighteen studies reported both experiences and outcomes of abortion care, nine reported abortion care experiences, seven reported abortion care outcomes, and one reported the development of a tool. The included studies identified negative experiences such as delays in obtaining care, stigmatisation, concerns about privacy and confidentiality, misinformation, and overstating risks, as well as psychological and emotional outcomes such as feeling guilt, sadness, and worry about future pregnancies. The findings also showed positive outcomes, including feelings of relief, happiness, and satisfaction with the services received. The review also identified the absence of reliable tools to assess patient-reported experiences and outcomes of abortion care in SSA.
conclusionsPeople experienced undesirable challenges while receiving abortion care. Despite negative psychological and emotional outcomes, satisfaction with care, relief, and happiness after abortion revealed in this review may indicate that abortion care is supportive in reducing the consequences of unwanted birth, which is not easily accessible in countries with restrictive abortion policies. A lack of validated measurement tools assessing abortion care experiences and outcomes requires the development of tools in this area.
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.