Disclosure to social network members among abortion-seeking women in low- and middle-income countries with restrictive access: a systematic review

• Main Authors: Clémentine Rossier (Author), Angela Marchin (Author), Caron Kim (Author), Bela Ganatra (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: BMC, 2021-06-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 10.1186/s12978-021-01165-0; 1742-4755
• Keywords: Unsafe abortion; Social network; Access to care; Low and middle income countries; Gynecology and obstetrics; RG1-991
• Source: Reproductive Health, Vol 18, Iss 1, Pp 1-15 (2021)

Plain Language summary Women seeking an induced abortion in LMICs often face inexistent or inadequate, difficult to find and/ or stigmatizing legal services, leading to the use of informal methods and providers, and unsafe abortions. A growing number of studies have shown that abortion seekers contact social network members beyond their intimate circle when seeking care. However, results have been inconsistent. We searched Pubmed, POPLINE, AIMS, LILACS, IMSEAR, and WPRIM databases for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from 2000 to 2018, concerning abortion information seeking, communication, networking and access to services in restrictive LMICs. We screened 4101 references, yielding 79 articles with data from 33 countries for extraction. We grouped countries (or social groups within countries) into four types of settings: (1) anonymous access possible, hyper stigma; (2) anonymous access possible, high stigma; (3) non-anonymous access, high stigma; (4) non-anonymous access, hyper stigma. Most studies fitted Type 3. Disclosing to network members increased across setting types: no women confided in network members in Type 1 settings, a minority in Type 2 and a majority in Type 3. No setting fitted Type 4. The informal use of medical abortion did not modify disclosure to others. Abortion seekers in restrictive LMICs frequently contact their social network in some settings/groups but less frequently in others, depending on the availability of anonymous access to abortion care and the level of stigma. This knowledge is useful for designing interventions to improve information on safe abortion and for developing network-based data collection strategies.