SynthesisSexual and reproductive health matters2025
Abortion stigma among people seeking abortion care in high-income countries: a mixed-methods systematic review.
Synthesis in Sexual and reproductive health matters, 2025. 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
Abortion is a common reproductive healthcare process that is often stigmatised. Research on abortion stigma has grown significantly since the last major review over a decade ago, and there is a pressing need for an updated, comprehensive systematic review. The purpose of this review is to examine the extent and subjective experiences of abortion stigma among those seeking an abortion in high-income countries. We aim to explore the theoretical conceptualisations of abortion stigma in relevant studies. We conducted a mixed-method systematic review following the JBI and PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, CINHAL, PsychINFO, LIVIVO and the Cochrane Library were searched for peer-reviewed articles. Quantitative studies were summarised narratively. Qualitative studies were synthesised using the JBI meta-aggregative approach. We included 41 qualitative, nine quantitative and three mixed-methods studies. Most studies lacked a substantial theoretical conceptualisation of abortion stigma. Quantitative studies reported prevalence rates of perceived abortion stigma ranging from 37% to 60%, suggesting that stigma remains a common experience among abortion seekers. Findings also indicate associations between abortion stigma and various sociodemographic factors (e.g. religion, race and age), as well as adverse mental health outcomes. In the qualitative studies, people seeking abortion care reported experiencing and anticipating judgment from healthcare professionals, anti-abortion activists and their close social circle. Their experiences also centred on the internalisation of shame and guilt. Some studies highlighted the mitigating effect of social support. Longitudinal and mixed-methods approaches with consistent assessment would be useful to better understand the developmental pathways of abortion stigma. This understanding is necessary to provide individual and structural support for people seeking abortion care.
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.