Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr;25(2):449-482.
doi: 10.1007/s10903-022-01437-2. Epub 2022 Dec 21.

Attitudes and Experiences Surrounding Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in the United States: A Scoping Review

Ghenet Besera  1   2 , Howard Goldberg  3 , Ekwutosi M Okoroh  2 , Margaret Christine Snead  4 , Crista E Johnson-Agbakwu  5   6   7   8 , Mary M Goodwin  2
Affiliations

Attitudes and Experiences Surrounding Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting in the United States: A Scoping Review

Ghenet Besera et al. J Immigr Minor Health. 2023 Apr.

Abstract

To identify research and gaps in literature about FGM/C-related attitudes and experiences among individuals from FGM/C-practicing countries living in the United States, we conducted a scoping review guided by Arksey and O'Malley's framework. We searched Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), PubMed, and SCOPUS and conducted a grey literature search for studies assessing attitudes or experiences related to FGM/C with data collected directly from individuals from FGM/C-practicing countries living in the United States. The search yielded 417 studies, and 40 met the inclusion criteria. Findings suggest that women and men from FGM/C-practicing countries living in the United States generally oppose FGM/C, and that women with FGM/C have significant physical and mental health needs and have found US healthcare providers to lack understanding of FGM/C. Future research can improve measurement of FGM/C by taking into account the sociocultural influences on FGM/C-related attitudes and experiences.

Keywords: Female circumcision; Female genital mutilation/cutting; Migrant health; Scoping review; United States.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow diagram of article selection
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Study design distribution (n = 40)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. WHO. Eliminating female genital mutilation: an interagency statement-OHCHR, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM. World Health Organization; 2008.
    1. Berg RC, Underland V, Odgaard-Jensen J, Fretheim A, Vist GE. Effects of female genital cutting on physical health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2014;4(11):e006316. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006316. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Abdalla SM, Galea S. Is female genital mutilation/cutting associated with adverse mental health consequences? A systematic review of the evidence. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(4):e001553–e. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001553. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shell-Duncan B, Naik R, Feldman-Jacobs CA. A State-of-the-Art Synthesis on Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting: What Do We Know Now? New York: Population Council. 2016.
    1. Berg RC, Denison E. A tradition in transition: factors perpetuating and hindering the continuance of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) summarized in a systematic review. Health Care Women Int. 2013;34(10):837–59. doi:10.1080/07399332.2012.721417. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources