Social Network Involvement in Abortion Care‐Seeking and Abortion Outcomes among a Population‐Based Sample of Nigerian Women Who Had Abortions

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Selena P. Anjur‐Dietrich, Funmilola M. OlaOlorun, Elizabeth Omoluabi, Philip Anglewicz, Suzanne O. Bell
{"title":"Social Network Involvement in Abortion Care‐Seeking and Abortion Outcomes among a Population‐Based Sample of Nigerian Women Who Had Abortions","authors":"Selena P. Anjur‐Dietrich, Funmilola M. OlaOlorun, Elizabeth Omoluabi, Philip Anglewicz, Suzanne O. Bell","doi":"10.1111/sifp.70067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People often engage social networks when navigating abortion access constraints, but limited research links this involvement to abortion outcomes. This cross‐sectional study analyzed <jats:italic>PMA2020</jats:italic> data from 1,144 women in Nigeria who had abortions, identified through population‐based surveys and abortion‐focused follow‐ups conducted in 2018 and 2019–2020, respectively. We examined how social network involvement in care‐seeking—specifically, in method or provider selection—related to abortion outcomes: medically defined abortion safety, use of preferred method and provider, and success of the initial abortion attempt. Social network involvement was common (63 percent) and varied across sociodemographic groups. Outcomes differed by involvement source: when both partners and family/friends were involved, women were least likely to have the least safe abortions (23.9 percent vs. 60.9 percent, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001) or make multiple abortion attempts (13.7 percent vs. 19.1 percent, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.009), though they were equally likely to use preferred care as those seeking care alone. Partner‐only involvement was also significantly associated with fewer least safe abortions (36.3 percent vs. 60.9 percent, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001), while family/friend‐only involvement was significantly associated with non‐preferred abortion options (36.6 percent vs. 21.6 percent, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> &lt; 0.001) and more repeated attempts (27.8 percent vs. 19.1 percent, <jats:italic>p</jats:italic> = 0.038). These findings suggest that social networks have the potential to improve or worsen abortion outcomes, with important variation across person‐centered measures of abortion experiences.","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.70067","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People often engage social networks when navigating abortion access constraints, but limited research links this involvement to abortion outcomes. This cross‐sectional study analyzed PMA2020 data from 1,144 women in Nigeria who had abortions, identified through population‐based surveys and abortion‐focused follow‐ups conducted in 2018 and 2019–2020, respectively. We examined how social network involvement in care‐seeking—specifically, in method or provider selection—related to abortion outcomes: medically defined abortion safety, use of preferred method and provider, and success of the initial abortion attempt. Social network involvement was common (63 percent) and varied across sociodemographic groups. Outcomes differed by involvement source: when both partners and family/friends were involved, women were least likely to have the least safe abortions (23.9 percent vs. 60.9 percent, p < 0.001) or make multiple abortion attempts (13.7 percent vs. 19.1 percent, p = 0.009), though they were equally likely to use preferred care as those seeking care alone. Partner‐only involvement was also significantly associated with fewer least safe abortions (36.3 percent vs. 60.9 percent, p < 0.001), while family/friend‐only involvement was significantly associated with non‐preferred abortion options (36.6 percent vs. 21.6 percent, p < 0.001) and more repeated attempts (27.8 percent vs. 19.1 percent, p = 0.038). These findings suggest that social networks have the potential to improve or worsen abortion outcomes, with important variation across person‐centered measures of abortion experiences.
在以人口为基础的尼日利亚堕胎妇女样本中,社会网络参与堕胎护理寻求和堕胎结果
人们在堕胎访问限制时经常参与社交网络,但有限的研究将这种参与与堕胎结果联系起来。这项横断面研究分析了尼日利亚1144名堕胎妇女的PMA2020数据,这些数据分别是通过2018年和2019-2020年进行的基于人口的调查和以堕胎为重点的随访确定的。我们研究了社会网络在寻求护理方面的参与——特别是在方法或提供者选择方面——与流产结果的关系:医学上定义的流产安全,首选方法和提供者的使用,以及首次流产尝试的成功。社交网络参与很普遍(63%),并且在不同的社会人口群体中有所不同。结果因参与来源而异:当伴侣和家人/朋友都参与时,女性最不可能进行最不安全的流产(23.9%对60.9%,p < 0.001)或多次流产尝试(13.7%对19.1%,p = 0.009),尽管她们与单独寻求护理的人一样有可能使用首选护理。仅伴侣参与也与较少的最不安全堕胎(36.3%对60.9%,p < 0.001)显著相关,而仅家人/朋友参与与非首选堕胎选择(36.6%对21.6%,p < 0.001)和更多的重复尝试(27.8%对19.1%,p = 0.038)显著相关。这些发现表明,社交网络有可能改善或恶化流产结果,在以人为中心的流产经历测量中存在重要差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
9.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Studies in Family Planning publishes public health, social science, and biomedical research concerning sexual and reproductive health, fertility, and family planning, with a primary focus on developing countries. Each issue contains original research articles, reports, a commentary, book reviews, and a data section with findings for individual countries from the Demographic and Health Surveys.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书