Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42428541›Full record

ArticleThe South African journal of psychiatry : SAJP : the journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa2026

Nqobile Muthwa, Yaseen Ally

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The South African journal of psychiatry : SAJP : the journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Nqobile MuthwaDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3510-0779
Yaseen AllyDepartment of Psychology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7896-465X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: South Africa is considered as the epicentre of rape. Despite the establishment of hospital-based post-rape centres, uptake remains limited. Within the context of medical pluralism, many individuals utilise both biomedical and traditional healing systems, which are often perceived as culturally congruent and accessible. This study explored post-rape care services provided by traditional health practitioners (THPs) when survivors seek care outside the formal healthcare system. Aim: The study aimed to demystify traditional healing methods used in post-rape care by describing treatment approaches and formulations. Setting: The study was conducted in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, which is a province with high rates of gender-based violence and rape. Methods: A qualitative descriptive design was used. Fifteen THPs, including faith healers, diviners, and herbalists, participated in one-on-one interviews conducted in isiZulu and translated into English. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and the healthworlds framework. Results: Findings indicated that rape was often understood as spiritual contamination affecting both survivors and their bloodline. Healing practices therefore focused on addressing this perceived spiritual transgression. Conclusion: The results of this study highlight the importance of culture and spirituality in shaping understandings of rape, treatment formulation, and holistic post-rape care. Contribution: The study demonstrates the significance of traditional healing methods in providing holistic post-rape care.

Indexed as

medical pluralismpost-rape carerapesexual violencespiritualitytraditional health practitioners (THP)

Identifiers

PMID42428541
PMCPMC13347921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.