ArticleReproductive health2026
Development of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measurement tool for abortion care in Ethiopia: a mixed-method study.
Article 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeasuring patient-reported experiences and outcomes of abortion care would enhance access to person-centred and rights-based abortion care. Assessment requires a reliable measurement approach to improve healthcare outcomes and service quality. Worldwide, there are no patient-reported measures to assess abortion care experiences and outcomes from the perspectives of the women accessing this service. This study developed a Patient-Reported Experience Measure (PREM) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) tool for women receiving abortion care services in Ethiopia.
methodsA sequential, exploratory mixed-methods study was conducted to develop the measures through standard tool development approaches. First, item pools were identified via a systematic review exploring experiences and current measures of outcomes of abortion care in sub-Saharan countries, and a qualitative study exploring the lived experience of abortion care pathways in Ethiopia. Second, item pools for experiences and outcomes of abortion care were assessed by a panel of experts in Ethiopia during two modified Delphi rounds. Items were removed if expert consensus or the item-level content validity index (I-CVI) was not achieved (I-CVI < 0.70). Finally, cognitive interviews were conducted with women to assess the relevance of measurement, interpretation, judgment formation, information recall, and response mapping. Qualitative data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively using frequencies and percentages.
resultsOverall, 72 items were included in the first round of the modified Delphi study, while 30 items remained in the final tools. Twenty-one items for the PREM and nine items for the PROM were retained. During the second Delphi round, I-CVI ranged between 0.55 and 1. During cognitive interviews, women reported that item instructions, wording, response options, and the recall period were clear and comprehensible. Women also described that the developed tool was relevant, brief, and covered important experiences and outcomes of abortion care.
conclusionsThe PREM and PROM tool was developed to assess experiences and outcomes for Ethiopians who access abortion care services. Researchers and healthcare providers can use the new measurements to monitor service quality, and policymakers can use the tool's results to improve women's health. Future research should undertake psychometric validation and assess potential applications worldwide.
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.