Cargando…
Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model
BACKGROUND: Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increas...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28964589 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31794-4 |
_version_ | 1783282987289280512 |
---|---|
author | Ganatra, Bela Gerdts, Caitlin Rossier, Clémentine Johnson, Brooke Ronald Tunçalp, Özge Assifi, Anisa Sedgh, Gilda Singh, Susheela Bankole, Akinrinola Popinchalk, Anna Bearak, Jonathan Kang, Zhenning Alkema, Leontine |
author_facet | Ganatra, Bela Gerdts, Caitlin Rossier, Clémentine Johnson, Brooke Ronald Tunçalp, Özge Assifi, Anisa Sedgh, Gilda Singh, Susheela Bankole, Akinrinola Popinchalk, Anna Bearak, Jonathan Kang, Zhenning Alkema, Leontine |
author_sort | Ganatra, Bela |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increasingly widespread use of misoprostol outside formal health systems in contexts where abortion is legally restricted, and the need to account for the multiple factors that affect abortion safety. METHODS: We used all available empirical data on abortion methods, providers, and settings, and factors affecting safety as covariates within a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the global, regional, and subregional distributions of abortion by safety categories. We used a three-tiered categorisation based on the WHO definition of unsafe abortion and WHO guidelines on safe abortion to categorise abortions as safe or unsafe and to further divide unsafe abortions into two categories of less safe and least safe. FINDINGS: Of the 55· 7 million abortions that occurred worldwide each year between 2010–14, we estimated that 30·6 million (54·9%, 90% uncertainty interval 49·9–59·4) were safe, 17·1 million (30·7%, 25·5–35·6) were less safe, and 8·0 million (14·4%, 11·5–18·1) were least safe. Thus, 25·1 million (45·1%, 40·6–50·1) abortions each year between 2010 and 2014 were unsafe, with 24·3 million (97%) of these in developing countries. The proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in developing countries than developed countries (49·5% vs 12·5%). When grouped by the legal status of abortion, the proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in those with less restrictive laws. INTERPRETATION: Increased efforts are needed, especially in developing countries, to ensure access to safe abortion. The paucity of empirical data is a limitation of these findings. Improved in-country data for health services and innovative research to address these gaps are needed to improve future estimates. FUNDING: UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; UK Aid from the UK Government; Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5711001 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57110012017-12-06 Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model Ganatra, Bela Gerdts, Caitlin Rossier, Clémentine Johnson, Brooke Ronald Tunçalp, Özge Assifi, Anisa Sedgh, Gilda Singh, Susheela Bankole, Akinrinola Popinchalk, Anna Bearak, Jonathan Kang, Zhenning Alkema, Leontine Lancet Article BACKGROUND: Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increasingly widespread use of misoprostol outside formal health systems in contexts where abortion is legally restricted, and the need to account for the multiple factors that affect abortion safety. METHODS: We used all available empirical data on abortion methods, providers, and settings, and factors affecting safety as covariates within a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the global, regional, and subregional distributions of abortion by safety categories. We used a three-tiered categorisation based on the WHO definition of unsafe abortion and WHO guidelines on safe abortion to categorise abortions as safe or unsafe and to further divide unsafe abortions into two categories of less safe and least safe. FINDINGS: Of the 55· 7 million abortions that occurred worldwide each year between 2010–14, we estimated that 30·6 million (54·9%, 90% uncertainty interval 49·9–59·4) were safe, 17·1 million (30·7%, 25·5–35·6) were less safe, and 8·0 million (14·4%, 11·5–18·1) were least safe. Thus, 25·1 million (45·1%, 40·6–50·1) abortions each year between 2010 and 2014 were unsafe, with 24·3 million (97%) of these in developing countries. The proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in developing countries than developed countries (49·5% vs 12·5%). When grouped by the legal status of abortion, the proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in those with less restrictive laws. INTERPRETATION: Increased efforts are needed, especially in developing countries, to ensure access to safe abortion. The paucity of empirical data is a limitation of these findings. Improved in-country data for health services and innovative research to address these gaps are needed to improve future estimates. FUNDING: UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; UK Aid from the UK Government; Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. Elsevier 2017-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5711001/ /pubmed/28964589 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31794-4 Text en © 2017 World Health Organization http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ganatra, Bela Gerdts, Caitlin Rossier, Clémentine Johnson, Brooke Ronald Tunçalp, Özge Assifi, Anisa Sedgh, Gilda Singh, Susheela Bankole, Akinrinola Popinchalk, Anna Bearak, Jonathan Kang, Zhenning Alkema, Leontine Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title | Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title_full | Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title_fullStr | Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title_full_unstemmed | Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title_short | Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model |
title_sort | global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a bayesian hierarchical model |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711001/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28964589 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31794-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ganatrabela globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT gerdtscaitlin globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT rossierclementine globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT johnsonbrookeronald globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT tuncalpozge globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT assifianisa globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT sedghgilda globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT singhsusheela globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT bankoleakinrinola globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT popinchalkanna globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT bearakjonathan globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT kangzhenning globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel AT alkemaleontine globalregionalandsubregionalclassificationofabortionsbysafety201014estimatesfromabayesianhierarchicalmodel |