ArticleBMJ open2026
Sexual and reproductive health impacts of modern slavery and human trafficking: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionModern slavery and human trafficking (MS-HT) are urgent and increasing global issues that violate human rights and have long-lasting consequences for those affected. The impact on individuals' health is well-documented, and MS-HT are recognised as critical public health issues, reflecting the extensive physical, psychological and social harms they produce, as well as the essential role of health systems in prevention, identification and response. Despite this, the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) impacts of exploitation in these contexts remain insufficiently addressed and understood. This scoping review will explore the SRH needs, outcomes and challenges of those impacted by MS-HT by synthesising existing evidence. This review is the first phase of a large-scale study to develop a reproductive justice framework for MS-HT research and practice towards improving access to SRH services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review will follow Arksey and O'Malley's framework which consists of the following five steps: (1) identifying the research question(s); (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) study selection; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarising and reporting the results. We will also follow the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines for a scoping review. We will include English language peer-reviewed publications and grey literature on the SRH needs, outcomes and challenges of those impacted by MS-HT published from January 2000 to August 2026. The three-step search strategy will involve an initial search of eight databases, citation mining of previous review studies, an advanced Google search and systematic searches of key anti-trafficking and SRHR organisation repositories. We will search EMBASE (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Scopus, Maternity and Infant Care (MIDIRS), CINAHL Ultimate, HeinOnline and Web of Science and the websites for the WHO, Human Rights Watch, Anti-Slavery International, International Justice Mission, Amnesty International, Guttmacher Institute and UN Women. Two reviewers will screen the titles, abstracts and full texts of publications against the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data will be extracted using a customised data charting form in Excel developed by the research team. Extracted data will be analysed using narrative analysis. Searches will be run starting 1 September 2026. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for a scoping review given that it is a synthesis of publicly available publications. Dissemination will be through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at relevant conferences, convenings of policymakers and civil society organisations, including those currently collaborating with the University of Nottingham's Rights Lab.
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.