Suppr超能文献

生殖胁迫在十个地点的流行情况及其关联因素:共性与差异。

Prevalence and correlates of reproductive coercion across ten sites: commonalities and divergence.

机构信息

Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, E4009, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA.

Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for Population and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.

出版信息

Reprod Health. 2023 Jan 27;20(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12978-023-01568-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Reproductive coercion (RC) is a type of abuse where a partner asserts control over a woman's reproductive health trajectories. Recent research emphasizes that RC experiences may differ within and across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), as compared to higher income contexts, given social pressures surrounding childbearing. To date, nationally representative surveys have lacked comprehensive measures for RC, leading to gaps in understanding its prevalence and risk factors. Across eight LMICs (10 sites), we aimed to (1) validate the RC Scale; (2) calculate prevalence of RC and specific behaviors; and (3) assess correlates of RC.

METHODS

This analysis leverages cross-sectional Performance Monitoring for Action (PMA) data collected from November 2020 to May 2022. Analyses were limited to women in need of contraception (Burkina Faso n = 2767; Côte d'Ivoire n = 1561; Kongo Central, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) n = 830; Kinshasa, DRC n = 846; Kenya n = 4588; Kano, Nigeria n = 535; Lagos, Nigeria n = 612; Niger n = 1525; Rajasthan, India n = 3017; Uganda n = 2020). Past-year RC was assessed via five items adapted from the original RC Scale and previously tested in LMICs. Confirmatory factor analysis examined fit statistics by site. Per-item and overall prevalence were calculated. Site-specific bivariate and multivariable logistic regression examined RC correlates across the socioecological framework.

RESULTS

Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed goodness of fit across all sites, with moderate internal consistency (alpha range: 0.66 Cote d'Ivoire-0.89 Kinshasa, DRC/Lagos, Nigeria). Past-year reported prevalence of RC was highest in Kongo Central, DRC (20.3%) and lowest in Niger (3.1%). Prevalence of individual items varied substantially by geography. Polygyny was the most common RC risk factor across six sites (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) range: 1.59-10.76). Increased partner education levels were protective in Kenya and Kano, Nigeria (aOR range: 0.23-0.67). Other assessed correlates differed by site.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding RC prevalence and behaviors is central to providing woman-centered reproductive care. RC was most strongly correlated with factors at the partner dyad level; future research is needed to unpack the relative contributions of relationship power dynamics versus cultural norms surrounding childbearing. Family planning services must recognize and respond to women's immediate needs to ensure RC does not alter reproductive trajectories, including vulnerability to unintended pregnancy.

摘要

背景

生殖胁迫(RC)是一种伴侣对女性生殖健康轨迹施加控制的虐待形式。最近的研究强调,与高收入环境相比,RC 经历在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs)内和跨国家可能存在差异,因为围绕生育的社会压力。迄今为止,全国代表性调查缺乏对 RC 的全面衡量标准,导致对其流行程度和风险因素的理解存在差距。在八个 LMIC 中(10 个地点),我们旨在:(1)验证 RC 量表;(2)计算 RC 和特定行为的发生率;(3)评估 RC 的相关性。

方法

本分析利用 2020 年 11 月至 2022 年 5 月期间收集的横截面绩效监测行动(PMA)数据进行。分析仅限于需要避孕的妇女(布基纳法索 n=2767;科特迪瓦 n=1561;刚果民主共和国(DRC)中的刚果中心 n=830;DRC 中的金沙萨 n=846;肯尼亚 n=4588;尼日利亚的卡诺 n=535;尼日利亚的拉各斯 n=612;尼日尔 n=1525;印度拉贾斯坦邦 n=3017;乌干达 n=2020)。过去一年的 RC 通过五项来自原始 RC 量表的改编项目进行评估,并在 LMIC 中进行了先前测试。验证性因素分析按地点检查了拟合统计数据。计算了每个项目和总体的流行率。地点特定的二变量和多变量逻辑回归检查了社会生态框架中 RC 的相关性。

结果

确认性因素分析证实了所有地点的拟合良好,内部一致性中等(alpha 范围:科特迪瓦 0.66-金沙萨,DRC/拉各斯,尼日利亚 0.89)。过去一年报告的 RC 发生率在刚果民主共和国的刚果中心最高(20.3%),在尼日尔最低(3.1%)。地理位置的个别项目的发生率差异很大。在六个地点中,一夫多妻制是最常见的 RC 风险因素(调整后的优势比(aOR)范围:1.59-10.76)。肯尼亚和尼日利亚的卡诺中,伴侣教育水平的提高具有保护作用(aOR 范围:0.23-0.67)。其他评估的相关性因地点而异。

结论

了解 RC 的流行率和行为是提供以妇女为中心的生殖护理的核心。RC 与伴侣对之间的因素最密切相关;需要进一步研究来剖析围绕生育的文化规范与关系权力动态之间的相对贡献。计划生育服务必须认识到并满足妇女的即时需求,以确保 RC 不会改变生殖轨迹,包括对意外怀孕的脆弱性。

相似文献

1
Prevalence and correlates of reproductive coercion across ten sites: commonalities and divergence.
Reprod Health. 2023 Jan 27;20(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12978-023-01568-1.
4
Prevalence and characteristics of covert contraceptive use in the Performance Monitoring for Action multi-country study.
Contracept X. 2022 May 6;4:100077. doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2022.100077. eCollection 2022.
8
Reproductive Coercion, Intimate Partner Violence, and Unintended Pregnancy Among Latina Women.
J Interpers Violence. 2022 Feb;37(3-4):1604-1636. doi: 10.1177/0886260520922363. Epub 2020 Jun 2.

引用本文的文献

1
Correlates of reproductive coercion among young women in Kingston, Jamaica and Hanoi, Vietnam.
medRxiv. 2025 May 25:2025.05.23.25328228. doi: 10.1101/2025.05.23.25328228.
4
Reproductive coercion and abuse in intimate relationships: Women's perceptions of perpetrator motivations.
PLoS One. 2024 Apr 16;19(4):e0299069. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299069. eCollection 2024.
5
Adolescent sexual and reproductive health and rights for ethnic minority girls in Vietnam.
Health Promot Int. 2024 Feb 1;39(1). doi: 10.1093/heapro/daad182.
6
Understanding ethical challenges of family planning interventions in sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.
Front Glob Womens Health. 2023 Aug 22;4:1149632. doi: 10.3389/fgwh.2023.1149632. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Reproductive Coercion among Intimate Partner Violence Survivors in Nairobi.
Stud Fam Plann. 2020 Dec;51(4):343-360. doi: 10.1111/sifp.12141.
4
Reproductive coercion in Uttar Pradesh, India: Prevalence and associations with partner violence and reproductive health.
SSM Popul Health. 2019 Nov 20;9:100484. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100484. eCollection 2019 Dec.
5
A Systematic Review of Reproductive Coercion in International Settings.
World Med Health Policy. 2016 Dec;8(4):382-408. doi: 10.1002/wmh3.209. Epub 2016 Nov 10.
6
Psychometric properties and refinement of the Reproductive Coercion Scale.
Contraception. 2017 Mar;95(3):292-298. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.09.010. Epub 2016 Sep 14.
8
A family planning clinic partner violence intervention to reduce risk associated with reproductive coercion.
Contraception. 2011 Mar;83(3):274-80. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2010.07.013.
9
Reproductive coercion: connecting the dots between partner violence and unintended pregnancy.
Contraception. 2010 Jun;81(6):457-9. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2010.02.023. Epub 2010 Apr 13.
10
Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy.
Contraception. 2010 Apr;81(4):316-22. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.12.004. Epub 2010 Jan 27.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验