Analysing the context and characteristics of legal abortion and comprehensive post-abortion care among adolescents aged 10–14 in a network of sentinel centres in Latin America: a retrospective cross-sectional study, 2016–2020

References

• Neal S, Matthews Z, Frost M, et al. Childbearing in adolescents aged 12-15 years in low resource countries: a neglected issue. New estimates from demographic and household surveys in 42 countries. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012;91(9):1114–1118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton GC, Coffey C, Sawyer SM, et al. Global patterns of mortality in young people: a systematic analysis of population health data. Lancet. 2009;374(9693):881–892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, et al. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Heal. 2014;2(6):323–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conde-Agudelo A, Belizán JM, Lammers C. Maternal-perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with adolescent pregnancy in Latin America: cross-sectional study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(2):342–349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliveira FC, Surita FG, Pinto e Silva JL, et al. Severe maternal morbidity and maternal near miss in the extremes of reproductive age: results from a national cross-sectional multicenter study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14(1).
   Google Scholar
• Williamson N. Motherhood in childhood: facing the challenge of adolescent pregnancy. UNFPA State of the World Population; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Sedgh G, Finer LB, Bankole A, et al. Adolescent pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates across countries: levels and recent trends. J Adolesc Heal. 2015;56(2):223–230. DOI: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.09.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woog V, Kågesten A. The sexual and reproductive health needs of very young adolescents aged 10-14 in developing countries: what does the evidence show? New York; 2017. Available from: https://www.guttmacher.org/report/srh-needs-very-young-adolescents-in-developing-countries.
   Google Scholar
• Center for Reproductive Rights. By the numbers: the legal status of abortion worldwide; 2019. p. 4. Available from: https://reproductiverights.org/sites/default/files/documents/World-Abortion-Map-ByTheNumbers.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. Information series on sexual and reproductive health and rights. Abortion. New York; 2020. p. 4. Available from: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Women/WRGS/SexualHealth/INFO_Abortion_WEB.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Safe abortion: technical and policy guidance for health systems. 2nd ed. Geneva; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Allotey P, Ravindran TKS, Sathivelu V. Trends in abortion policies in low- and middle-income countries. Annu Rev Public Health. 2020;42:505–518.
   Google Scholar
• Espinoza C, Samandari G, Andersen K. Abortion knowledge, attitudes and experiences among adolescent girls: a review of the literature. Sex Reprod Heal Matters. 2020;28(1).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saavedra-Avendano B, Schiavon R, Sanhueza P, et al. Who presents past the gestational age limit for first trimester abortion in the public sector in Mexico City?. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0192547. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192547.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• World Health Organization. Abortion care guideline. Geneva; 2022. Available from: licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
   Google Scholar
• Centro Latinoamericano de Perinatología Salud de la Mujer y Reproductiva - CLAP/SMR - OPS/OMS. Mejorando la salud sexual y reproductiva de las mujeres: Reporte FGL/CLAP-SMR. Bogotá; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Fescina R, De Mucio B, Martínez G, et al. Sistema Informático Perinatal (SIP): historia clínica perinatal: instrucciones de llenado y definición de términos. Montevideo; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson Jr. B, Mishra V, Lavelanet A, et al. A global database of abortion laws, policies, health standards and guidelines. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95:542–544.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Say L, Souza JP, Pattinson RC. Maternal near miss - towards a standard tool for monitoring quality of maternal health care. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;23(3):287–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Medical management of abortion. Geneva; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Health worker roles in providing safe abortion care and post-abortion contraception. Geneva; 2015 [cited 2019 Jul 4]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/181041/9789241549264_eng.pdf;jsessionid = E553EAD0014FF69AE9E4801F3A55E69E?sequence = 1.
   Google Scholar
• Milchak JL, Carter BL, James PA, et al. Measuring adherence to practice guidelines for the management of hypertension: an evaluation of the literature. Hypertension. 2004;44(5):602–608.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Milchak JL, Carter BL, Ardery G, et al. Development of explicit criteria to measure adherence to hypertension guidelines. J Hum Hypertens. 2006;20(6):426–433.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ardery G, Carter BL, Milchak JL, et al. Explicit and implicit evaluation of physician adherence to hypertension guidelines. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2007;9(2):113–119.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Melman S, Schoorel ECN, De Boer K, et al. Development and measurement of guidelines-based quality indicators of caesarean section care in the Netherlands: a RAND-modified Delphi procedure and retrospective medical chart review. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Lomas J, Anderson GM, Dominick-Pierre K, et al. Do practice guidelines guide practice? The effect of a consensus statement on the practice of physicians. N Engl J Med. 1989;321(19):1306–1311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol F, Van Den Boogaard E, Van Mello NM, et al. Guideline adherence in ectopic pregnancy management. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(2):307–315.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kassebaum NJ, Barber RM, Dandona L, et al. Global, regional, and national levels of maternal mortality, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2016;388(10053):1775–1812.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diedrich J, Steinauer J. Complications of surgical abortion. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;52(2):205–212.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ferris LE, McMain-Klein M, Colodny N, et al. Factors associated with immediate abortion complications. Can Med Assoc J. 1996;154(11):1677–1685.
   Google Scholar
• Zane S, Creanga AA, Berg CJ, et al. Abortion-related mortality in the United States 1998-2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(2):258–265. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/00006250-201508000-00006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olukoya AA, Kaya A, Ferguson BJ, et al. Unsafe abortion in adolescents. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2001;75(2):137–147.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Taquette SR, Monteiro DLM, Rodrigues NCP, et al. A invisibilidade da magnitude do estupro de meninas no Brasil [The invisible magnitude of the rape of girls in Brazil]. Rev Saude Publica. 2021;55:103. Available from: https://www.revistas.usp.br/rsp/article/view/194828.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Caffe S, Plesons M, Camacho AV, et al. Looking back and moving forward: can we accelerate progress on adolescent pregnancy in the americas? Reprod Health. 2017;14(1):1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Vargas Nunes Coll C, Ewerling F, Hellwig F, et al. Contraception in adolescence: the influence of parity and marital status on contraceptive use in 73 low-and middle-income countries. Reprod Health. 2019;16(1):1–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ponce de Leon RG, Ewerling F, Serruya SJ, et al. Contraceptive use in Latin America and the Caribbean with a focus on long-acting reversible contraceptives: prevalence and inequalities in 23 countries. Lancet Glob Heal. 2019;7(2):e227–e235. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30481-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francis JKR, Gold MA. Long-acting reversible contraception for adolescents: A review. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(7):694–701.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (WHO). Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use – 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Christofield M, Lacoste M. Accessible contraceptive implant removal services: an essential element of quality service delivery and scale-up. Glob Heal Sci Pract. 2018;4(3):366–372.
   Google Scholar
• Cavallaro FL, Benova L, Owolabi OO, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of counselling strategies for modern contraceptive methods: what works and what doesn’t? BMJ Sex Reprod Heal. 2020;46(4):254–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandra-Mouli V, Akwara E. Improving access to and use of contraception by adolescents: what progress has been made, what lessons have been learnt, and what are the implications for action? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;66:107–118. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2020.04.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavrow P. Promote or discourage: how providers can influence service use. In: Malarcher S, editor. Social determinants of sexual and rperoductive health: informing future research and programme implementation. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. p. 15–36.
   Google Scholar
• Wells BJ, Nowacki AS, Chagin K, et al. Strategies for handling missing data in electronic health record derived data. eGEMs. 2013;1(3):7.
   Google Scholar