特朗普政府扩大全球禁言政策对埃塞俄比亚计划生育服务提供的影响

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 DEMOGRAPHY
Elizabeth A. Sully, S. Shiferaw, A. Seme, S. Bell, Margaret Giorgio
{"title":"特朗普政府扩大全球禁言政策对埃塞俄比亚计划生育服务提供的影响","authors":"Elizabeth A. Sully, S. Shiferaw, A. Seme, S. Bell, Margaret Giorgio","doi":"10.1111/sifp.12196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Global Gag Rule (GGR) makes non‐U.S. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) ineligible for U.S. Government global health funding if they provide, refer, or promote access to abortion. This study quantitatively examines the impacts of the GGR on family planning service provision in Ethiopia. Using a panel of health facilities (2017–2020), we conduct a pre–post analysis to investigate the overall changes in family planning service provision before and after the policy came into effect in Ethiopia. Our pre–post analyses revealed post‐GGR reductions in the proportions of facilities reporting family planning provision through community health volunteers (−5.6, 95% CI [−10.2, −1.0]), mobile outreach visits (−13.1, 95% CI [−17.8, −8.4]), and family planning and postabortion care service integration (−4.8, 95% CI: [−9.1, −0.5]), as well as a 6.1 percentage points increase in contraceptive stock‐outs over the past three months (95% CI [−0.6, 12.8]). We further investigate the impacts of the GGR on facilities exposed to noncompliant organizations that did not sign the policy and lost U.S. funding. We do not find any significant additional impacts on facilities in regions more exposed to noncompliant organizations. Overall, while the GGR was slow to fully impact NGOs in Ethiopia, it ultimately resulted in negative impacts on family planning service provision.","PeriodicalId":22069,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Family Planning","volume":"53 1","pages":"339 - 359"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of the Trump Administration's Expanded Global Gag Rule Policy on Family Planning Service Provision in Ethiopia\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth A. Sully, S. Shiferaw, A. Seme, S. Bell, Margaret Giorgio\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/sifp.12196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The Global Gag Rule (GGR) makes non‐U.S. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) ineligible for U.S. Government global health funding if they provide, refer, or promote access to abortion. This study quantitatively examines the impacts of the GGR on family planning service provision in Ethiopia. Using a panel of health facilities (2017–2020), we conduct a pre–post analysis to investigate the overall changes in family planning service provision before and after the policy came into effect in Ethiopia. Our pre–post analyses revealed post‐GGR reductions in the proportions of facilities reporting family planning provision through community health volunteers (−5.6, 95% CI [−10.2, −1.0]), mobile outreach visits (−13.1, 95% CI [−17.8, −8.4]), and family planning and postabortion care service integration (−4.8, 95% CI: [−9.1, −0.5]), as well as a 6.1 percentage points increase in contraceptive stock‐outs over the past three months (95% CI [−0.6, 12.8]). We further investigate the impacts of the GGR on facilities exposed to noncompliant organizations that did not sign the policy and lost U.S. funding. We do not find any significant additional impacts on facilities in regions more exposed to noncompliant organizations. Overall, while the GGR was slow to fully impact NGOs in Ethiopia, it ultimately resulted in negative impacts on family planning service provision.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22069,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"339 - 359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Family Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12196\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Family Planning","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/sifp.12196","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: 6

摘要

摘要:全球禁言规则(GGR)使得非美国禁言规则得以实施非政府组织如果提供、推荐或促进堕胎,就没有资格获得美国政府的全球卫生资助。本研究定量考察了埃塞俄比亚GGR对计划生育服务提供的影响。利用一组卫生设施(2017-2020年),我们进行了前后分析,以调查政策在埃塞俄比亚生效前后计划生育服务提供的总体变化。我们的事后分析显示,通过社区卫生志愿者报告计划生育提供的设施比例(- 5.6,95% CI[- 10.2, - 1.0])、移动外展访问(- 13.1,95% CI[- 17.8, - 8.4])、计划生育和堕胎后护理服务整合(- 4.8,95% CI:[- 9.1, - 0.5])有所下降,过去三个月避孕药具库存缺置率增加了6.1个百分点(95% CI[- 0.6, 12.8])。我们进一步调查了GGR对暴露于未签署政策并失去美国资助的不合规组织的设施的影响。我们没有发现对不合规组织较多的地区的设施有任何显著的额外影响。总体而言,虽然GGR对埃塞俄比亚非政府组织的全面影响缓慢,但它最终对计划生育服务的提供产生了负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of the Trump Administration's Expanded Global Gag Rule Policy on Family Planning Service Provision in Ethiopia
Abstract The Global Gag Rule (GGR) makes non‐U.S. nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) ineligible for U.S. Government global health funding if they provide, refer, or promote access to abortion. This study quantitatively examines the impacts of the GGR on family planning service provision in Ethiopia. Using a panel of health facilities (2017–2020), we conduct a pre–post analysis to investigate the overall changes in family planning service provision before and after the policy came into effect in Ethiopia. Our pre–post analyses revealed post‐GGR reductions in the proportions of facilities reporting family planning provision through community health volunteers (−5.6, 95% CI [−10.2, −1.0]), mobile outreach visits (−13.1, 95% CI [−17.8, −8.4]), and family planning and postabortion care service integration (−4.8, 95% CI: [−9.1, −0.5]), as well as a 6.1 percentage points increase in contraceptive stock‐outs over the past three months (95% CI [−0.6, 12.8]). We further investigate the impacts of the GGR on facilities exposed to noncompliant organizations that did not sign the policy and lost U.S. funding. We do not find any significant additional impacts on facilities in regions more exposed to noncompliant organizations. Overall, while the GGR was slow to fully impact NGOs in Ethiopia, it ultimately resulted in negative impacts on family planning service provision.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信