MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400926316 · doi:10.1186/s12978-024-01852-8

A qualitative exploration of the reasons and influencing factors for pregnancy termination among young women in Soweto, South Africa: a Socio-ecological perspective

2024· article· en· W4400926316 on OpenAlexafffund
Khuthala Mabetha, Larske M. Soepnel, Derrick Ssewanyana, Catherine E. Draper, Stephen J. Lye, Shane A. Norris

Bibliographic record

VenueReproductive Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSouth African Medical Research Council
KeywordsPregnancyThematic analysisReproductive medicineUnintended pregnancyFeelingPublic healthQualitative researchMedicineInterpersonal communicationPsychologyPopulationDemographyDevelopmental psychologyEnvironmental healthSocial psychologyFamily planningNursingSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy termination is an essential component of reproductive healthcare. In Southern Africa, an estimated 23% of all pregnancies end in termination of pregnancy, against a backdrop of high rates of unintended pregnancies and unsafe pregnancy terminations, which contributes to maternal morbidity and mortality. Understanding the reasons for pregnancy termination may remain incomplete if seen in isolation of interpersonal (including family, peer, and partner), community, institutional, and public policy factors. This study therefore aimed to use a socio-ecological framework to qualitatively explore, in Soweto, South Africa, i) reasons for pregnancy termination amongst women aged 18-28 years, and ii) factors characterising the decision to terminate. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted between February to March 2022 with ten participants of varying parity, who underwent a termination of pregnancy since being enrolled in the Bukhali trial, set in Soweto, South Africa. A semi-structured, in-depth interview guide, based on the socioecological domains, was used. The data was analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, and a deductive approach. RESULTS: An application of the socio-ecological framework indicated that the direct reasons to terminate a pregnancy fell into the individual and interpersonal domains of the socioecological framework. Key reasons included financial dependence and insecurity, feeling unready to have a child (again), and a lack of support from family and partners for the participant and their pregnancy. In addition to these reasons, Factors that characterised the participants' decision experience were identified across all socio-ecological domains and included the availability of social support and (lack of) accessibility to termination services. The COVID-19 pandemic and resultant lockdown policies also indirectly impacted participants' decisions through detrimental changes in interpersonal support and financial situation. CONCLUSIONS: Amongst the South African women included in this study, the decision to terminate a pregnancy was made within a complex structural and social context. Insight into the reasons why women choose to terminate helps to better align legal termination services with women's needs across multiple sectors, for example by reducing judgement within healthcare settings and improving access to social and mental health support.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductive HealthSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207