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 Oct 19;13(10):e073326.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073326.

Risk factors and health consequences of experiencing reproductive coercion: a scoping review protocol

Susan Saldanha  1   2 , Desireé LaGrappe  2   3 , Jessica R Botfield  4   2 , Danielle Mazza  4   2
Affiliations

Risk factors and health consequences of experiencing reproductive coercion: a scoping review protocol

Susan Saldanha et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Reproductive coercion (RC) describes behaviours that interfere with an individual's reproductive autonomy and decision-making. RC can be a form of intimate partner violence and overlaps with other forms of gender-based violence, such as sexual violence. Health settings are well placed to identify and intervene to support patients experiencing RC, however, the lack of conceptual clarity on RC means that health providers are not easily able to identify those at risk of experiencing RC. To facilitate appropriate identification and development of interventions, there is a need to understand the risk factors related to experiencing RC and associated health consequences.

Aim: To assess the current scope of evidence in relation to risk factors and health consequences of experiencing RC.

Methods and analysis: Eligible articles for inclusion in the scoping review will be original peer-reviewed literature that describe risk factors and health consequences of any type of RC. Studies on humans published in English since 2010 will be included. The proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the JBI Methodology. This protocol is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. Five electronic databases, OVID Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, PsychINFO and Embase, will be searched for relevant literature from 1 January 2010 to 23 January 2023. Two reviewers will individually screen and review articles for eligibility, and conflicts will be resolved by a third reviewer. Data will be charted and reported using a tool developed for the purpose of this review.

Ethics and dissemination: Findings will be disseminated in publications and presentations to relevant stakeholders. Ethical approval is not required as data from publicly available literature sources will be used. Available evidence will be mapped across the breadth of eligible studies to identify associated risk factors and health consequences of RC.

Keywords: PUBLIC HEALTH; Reproductive medicine; Risk Factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Tarzia L, Hegarty K. A conceptual re-evaluation of reproductive coercion: Centring intent, fear and control. Reprod Health 2021;18:87. 10.1186/s12978-021-01143-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Grace KT, Anderson JC. Reproductive coercion: A systematic review. Trauma Violence Abuse 2018;19:371–90. 10.1177/1524838016663935 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marie Stopes Australia . Marie Stopes Australia; Hidden Forces: A white paper on reproductive coercion in contexts of family and domestic violence, . 2020Available: https://www.mariestopes.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Hidden-Forces-Second-E...
    1. Carter A, Bateson D, Vaughan C. Reproductive coercion and abuse in Australia: what do we need to know Sex Health 2021;18:436–40. 10.1071/SH21116 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Campbell JC. Health consequences of intimate partner violence. The Lancet 2002;359:1331–6. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08336-8 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources