Dataset Information

Experiences of women who travel for abortion: A mixed methods systematic review.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To systematically review the literature on women's experiences traveling for abortion and assess how this concept has been explored and operationalized, with a focus on travel distance, cost, delays, and other barriers to receiving services. BACKGROUND:Increasing limitations on abortion providers and access to care have increased the necessity of travel for abortion services around the world. No systematic examination of women's experiences traveling for abortion has been conducted; this mixed-methods review provides a summary of the qualitative and quantitative literature on this topic. METHODS:A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Popline, and Google Scholar in July 2016 and updated in March 2017 (PROSPERO registration # CRD42016046007). We included original research studies that described women's experiences traveling for abortion. Two reviewers independently performed article screening, data extraction and determination of final inclusion for analysis. Critical appraisal was conducted using CASP, STROBE, and MMAT checklists. RESULTS:We included 59 publications: 46 quantitative studies, 12 qualitative studies, and 1 mixed-methods study. Most studies were published in the last five years, relied on data from the US, and discussed travel as a secondary outcome of interest. In quantitative studies, travel was primarily conceptualized and measured as road or straight-line distance to abortion provider, though some studies also incorporated measures of burdens related to travel, such as financial cost, childcare needs, and unwanted disclosure of their abortion status to others. Qualitative studies explored regional disparities in access to abortion care, with a focus on the burdens related to travel, the impact of travel on abortion method choice, and women's reasons for travel. Studies generally were of high quality, though many studies lacked information on participant recruitment or consideration of potential biases. CONCLUSIONS:Standardized measurements of travel, including burdens associated with travel and more nuanced considerations of travel costs, should be implemented in order to facilitate comparison across studies. More research is needed to explore and accurately capture different dimensions of the burden of travel for abortion services on women's lives.

SUBMITTER: Barr-Walker J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6456165 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Experiences of women who travel for abortion: A mixed methods systematic review.

Barr-Walker Jill J Jayaweera Ruvani T RT Ramirez Ana Maria AM Gerdts Caitlin C

PloS one 20190409 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To systematically review the literature on women's experiences traveling for abortion and assess how this concept has been explored and operationalized, with a focus on travel distance, cost, delays, and other barriers to receiving services.<h4>Background</h4>Increasing limitations on abortion providers and access to care have increased the necessity of travel for abortion services around the world. No systematic examination of women's experiences traveling for abortion has bee ...[more]

PMID: 30964860

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo map travel policies implemented due to COVID-19 during 2020, and conduct a mixed-methods systematic review of health effects of such policies, and related contextual factors.DesignPolicy mapping and systematic review. DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: for the policy mapping, we searched websites of relevant government bodies and used data from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker for a convenient sample of 31 countries across different regions. For the systematic review, we searched Medline (Ovid), PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and COVID-19 specific databases. We included randomized controlled trial, non-randomized studies, modeling studies, and qualitative studies. Two independent reviewers selected studies, abstracted data and assessed risk of bias.ResultsMost countries adopted a total border closure at the start of the pandemic. For the remainder of the year, partial border closure banning arrivals from some countries or regions was the most widely adopted measure, followed by mandatory quarantine and screening of travelers. The systematic search identified 69 eligible studies, including 50 modeling studies. Both observational and modeling evidence suggest that border closure may reduce the number of COVID-19 cases, disease spread across countries and between regions, and slow the progression of the outbreak. These effects are likely to be enhanced when implemented early, and when combined with measures reducing transmission rates in the community. Quarantine of travelers may decrease the number of COVID-19 cases but its effectiveness depends on compliance and enforcement and is more effective if followed by testing, especially when less than 14 day-quarantine is considered. Screening at departure and/or arrival is unlikely to detect a large proportion of cases or to delay an outbreak. Effectiveness of screening may be improved with increased sensitivity of screening tests, awareness of travelers, asymptomatic screening, and exit screening at country source. While four studies on contextual evidence found that the majority of the public is supportive of travel restrictions, they uncovered concerns about the unintended harms of those policies.ConclusionMost countries adopted full or partial border closure in response to COVID-19 in 2020. Evidence suggests positive effects on controlling the COVID-19 pandemic for border closure (particularly when implemented early), as well as quarantine of travelers (particularly with higher levels of compliance). While these positive effects are enhanced when implemented in combination with other public health measures, they are associated with concerns by the public regarding some unintended effects.

Project description:BackgroundOlder people with kidney failure often choose conservative kidney care. The experiences and quality of life (QOL) of caregivers who support them are incompletely characterized.ObjectiveTo determine the burden, QOL, and understand experiences of caregivers supporting patients managed conservatively.DesignSystematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.Sources of informationPubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and MEDLINE electronic databases were systematically searched for quantitative and qualitative studies published between January 2000 and July 2020.SubjectsCaregivers of adults with kidney failure (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 15 mL/min/1.73 m2) managed conservatively.MethodsData were extracted by 2 independent reviewers using a prespecified extraction tool. Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) tool.MeasurementsDescriptive reports of demographics, measurement scales, and outcomes. Thematic synthesis of qualitative data.ResultsSix studies met inclusion criteria, including 3 quantitative and 3 descriptive qualitative studies. Caregivers of patients receiving conservative kidney management (CKM) experienced significant caregiver burden and similar impacts to their QOL as those caring for patients receiving dialysis. Thematic synthesis revealed 5 themes: Understanding the concept of CKM, Need for involvement in the decision for CKM, Identifying available supports, Uncertainty about the future and negotiating deteriorations and dying, and Burden of care impacting on QOL.LimitationsLow numbers of included studies, data collection and recruitment biases in qualitative studies and small caregiver numbers in quantitative studies, limit transferability of findings. Heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures precluded meta-analysis.ConclusionsCaregivers of patients with conservatively managed kidney failure suffer significant burden and experience QOL comparable with those caring for patients on dialysis. Limited understanding and involvement in conservative management decision making, and a fear of deterioration and dying, result in anxiety in caregivers. Further research into the experiences of caregivers will help support both caregivers and the patients who choose conservative management.RegistrationPROSPERO registration number CRD42021209811.

Project description:BACKGROUND:When certain complications arise during the second stage of labour, assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), a vaginal birth with forceps or vacuum extractor, can effectively improve outcomes by ending prolonged labour or by ensuring rapid birth in response to maternal or fetal compromise. In recent decades, the use of AVD has decreased in many settings in favour of caesarean section (CS). This review aimed to improve understanding of experiences, barriers and facilitators for AVD use. METHODS:Systematic searches of eight databases using predefined search terms to identify studies reporting views and experiences of maternity service users, their partners, health care providers, policymakers, and funders in relation to AVD. Relevant studies were assessed for methodological quality. Qualitative findings were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach. Confidence in review findings was assessed using GRADE CERQual. Findings from quantitative studies were synthesised narratively and assessed using an adaptation of CERQual. Qualitative and quantitative review findings were triangulated using a convergence coding matrix. RESULTS:Forty-two studies (published 1985-2019) were included: six qualitative, one mixed-method and 35 quantitative. Thirty-five were from high-income countries, and seven from LMIC settings. Confidence in the findings was moderate or low. Spontaneous vaginal birth was most likely to be associated with positive short and long-term outcomes, and emergency CS least likely. Views and experiences of AVD tended to fall somewhere between these two extremes. Where indicated, AVD can be an effective, acceptable alternative to caesarean section. There was agreement or partial agreement across qualitative studies and surveys that the experience of AVD is impacted by the unexpected nature of events and, particularly in high-income settings, unmet expectations. Positive relationships, good communication, involvement in decision-making, and (believing in) the reason for intervention were important mediators of birth experience. Professional attitudes and skills (development) were simultaneously barriers and facilitators of AVD in quantitative studies. CONCLUSIONS:Information, positive interaction and communication with providers and respectful care are facilitators for acceptance of AVD. Barriers include lack of training and skills for decision-making and use of instruments.

Project description:BackgroundDespite growing recognition of neglectful, abusive, and disrespectful treatment of women during childbirth in health facilities, there is no consensus at a global level on how these occurrences are defined and measured. This mixed-methods systematic review aims to synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence on the mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities to inform the development of an evidence-based typology of the phenomenon.Methods and findingsWe searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases and grey literature using a predetermined search strategy to identify qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies on the mistreatment of women during childbirth across all geographical and income-level settings. We used a thematic synthesis approach to synthesize the qualitative evidence and assessed the confidence in the qualitative review findings using the CERQual approach. In total, 65 studies were included from 34 countries. Qualitative findings were organized under seven domains: (1) physical abuse, (2) sexual abuse, (3) verbal abuse, (4) stigma and discrimination, (5) failure to meet professional standards of care, (6) poor rapport between women and providers, and (7) health system conditions and constraints. Due to high heterogeneity of the quantitative data, we were unable to conduct a meta-analysis; instead, we present descriptions of study characteristics, outcome measures, and results. Additional themes identified in the quantitative studies are integrated into the typology.ConclusionsThis systematic review presents a comprehensive, evidence-based typology of the mistreatment of women during childbirth in health facilities, and demonstrates that mistreatment can occur at the level of interaction between the woman and provider, as well as through systemic failures at the health facility and health system levels. We propose this typology be adopted to describe the phenomenon and be used to develop measurement tools and inform future research, programs, and interventions.

Project description:IntroductionProper controlling gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM)-related gestational weight gain (GWG) during pregnancy can optimize pregnancy outcomes and improve postpartum glucose homeostasis. This study aimed to explore the existing intervention programs, the effects on pregnancy outcomes, and the experiences of weight management for GDM-related GWG in women with GDM.MethodsThis mixed-methods systematic review was retrieved from nine databases. The retrieval time was from the database construction to September 20, 2023, and all studies were published in English and Chinese. The included records used quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods and reported original studies of weight-related intervention regimens, effects on pregnancy outcomes, and women's experiences and perceptions. This review used a convergent segregated approach to synthesize and integrate research findings from Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) mixed-methods systematic reviews.ResultsThere were 16 articles that met the inclusion criteria, and the articles came from seven different countries and included 23,997 women with GDM. The meta-analysis pooled outcomes for the incidence of weight gain exceeding the Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommendations after GDM diagnosis to delivery was 0.31% (95% CI 0.21-0.42). The effectiveness of GDM-related weight interventions in reducing weight gain after GDM diagnosis was supported by quantitative evidence. The GDM-related GWG below the IOM recommendations is a protective factor (OR=0.68, 95%CI 0.48-0.97) for large for gestational Age (LGA), and above the IOM recommendations is a risk factor (OR=1.62, 95%CI 1.15-2.27) for LGA. In addition, no significant statistical significance was found in the pooled outcomes of small for gestational age (SGA). Avoiding excessive weight gain helps to optimize neonatal birth weight, pregnancy outcomes, and maternal blood glucose levels. According to qualitative survey results, some women with GDM experienced weight stigma, and a positive relationship between healthcare providers and GDM women helped in weight management.ConclusionFollowing a diagnosis of GDM, weight management interventions positively affected GWG and pregnancy outcomes. In order to improve compliance and safety of weight management in women with GDM, criteria and interventions for weight gain associated with GDM need to be further explored and improved.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=404492, identifier CRD42023404492.

Dataset Information

Experiences of women who travel for abortion: A mixed methods systematic review.

Publications

Experiences of women who travel for abortion: A mixed methods systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets