How the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is impacting sexual and reproductive health and rights and response: Results from a global survey of providers, researchers, and policy‐makers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to give a global overview of trends in access to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and what is being done to mitigate its impact. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a descriptive analysis and content analysis based on an online survey among clinicians, researchers, and organizations. Our data were extracted from multiple-choice questions on access to SRHR services and risk of SRHR violations, and written responses to open-ended questions on threats to access and required response. RESULTS: The survey was answered by 51 people representing 29 countries. Eighty-six percent reported that access to contraceptive services was less or much less because of COVID-19, corresponding figures for surgical and medical abortion were 62% and 46%. The increased risk of gender-based and sexual violence was assessed as moderate or severe by 79%. Among countries with mildly restrictive abortion policies, 69% had implemented changes to facilitate access to abortion during the pandemic, compared with none among countries with severe restrictions (P < .001), 87.5% compared with 46% had implemented changes to facilitate access to contraception (P = .023). The content analysis showed that (a) prioritizations in health service delivery at the expense of SRHR, (b) lack of political will, (c) the detrimental effect of lockdown, and (d) the suspension of sexual education, were threats to SRHR access (theme 1). Requirements to mitigate these threats (theme 2) were (a) political will and support of universal access to SRH services, (b) the sensitization of providers, (c) free public transport, and (d) physical protective equipment. A contrasting third theme was the state of exception of the COVID-19 pandemic as a window of opportunity to push forward women's health and rights. CONCLUSIONS: Many countries have seen decreased access to and increased violations of SRHR during the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries with severe restrictions on abortion seem less likely to have implemented changes to SRHR delivery to mitigate this impact. Political will to support the advancement of SRHR is often lacking, which is fundamental to ensuring both continued access and, in a minority of cases, the solidification of gains made to SRHR during the pandemic.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».