ArticleBMJ public health2026
Access to sexual and reproductive healthcare for refugees transiting through Europe: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual and reproductive health needs of refugee women on Lesbos, Greece: a participatory cross-sectional study.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Impact of Displacement on Refugee Women's Sexual and Reproductive Health: A Participatory Study Using Photovoice.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To map and synthesise the existing evidence on access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services among refugees transiting across the European Region and to identify key barriers, facilitators and emerging strategies for equitable care. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: Peer-reviewed (Embase, Medline and Web of Science) and grey literature. Eligibility criteria: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods publications from 2012 onwards reporting on access to SRH services among refugees transiting through WHO European Region member states. Data extraction and synthesis: From 1951 screened records, 41 publications across 12 countries were included. Data were extracted using standardised templates and charted using qualitative content analysis. Barriers and facilitators were mapped onto Levesque's healthcare access framework. Results: Predominantly, on the supply-side of Levesque's framework, 72 barriers and 19 facilitators were identified. Refugees in transit face multiple, intersecting barriers to SRH care, including limited availability of gender-sensitive services, staff shortages, language barriers and weak coordination across providers. Health is often deprioritised during migration journeys, while low trust in health systems-compounded by limited health literacy and lack of culturally appropriate care-further constrains access. Findings highlight the need for provider training in cultural sensitivity, gender-based violence and female genital mutilation/cutting. At the same time, several promising interventions were identified. Safe, gender-sensitive spaces and community-based partnerships facilitate trust-building and more responsive service delivery and digital tools show potential to address language, continuity and literacy challenges, particularly in fragmented or overstretched systems. Conclusions: SRH responses for refugees in transit across the European Region must move beyond short-term, emergency-oriented approaches towards sustained, inclusive and community-driven models of care. An adapted version of Levesque's framework, adapted to account for displacement and linguistic exclusion, may be better suited for this population.
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.