Experiences of Person-Centred Comprehensive Abortion Care: A Qualitative Study Among Women in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) unsafe abortion claims thousands of lives every year. Under the 2018 Maputo protocol ratification, officials are implementing abortion services, yet abortion stigma contributes to delays in access to care. A recognized approach, person-centred care, can improve the quality and access to care in DRC. The aim of this study was to understand the experiences of women who received an abortion with midwives, nurses or physicians recently trained in comprehensive abortion care (CAC) using person-centred approaches in the capital city of Kinshasa. A qualitative design with semi-structured interviews captured the complexity and richness of twenty-five women who accessed CAC with trained healthcare providers. Participants were interviewed two weeks post-abortion. The analysis was thematic and applied person-centred abortion care frameworks. Participants emphasized the importance of emotional and psychological support from healthcare providers, and care that was empathetic, informative, reassuring and rapport building over time. They valued services tailored to their needs including care delivered virtually or outside of traditional clinical settings before, during, and after the abortion process. Relational continuity across the care journey, was central to their experiences and helped reduce feelings of isolation and stigma. Person-centred abortion care approaches can be expanded to explore how the care process, particularly the nexus between healthcare provider and client, shapes the overall experience. In DRC this includes prioritizing programs to support continuity of healthcare provider, and community-based care including the option for abortion self-management.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".