Research Article
Repeated Induced Abortion and Trends of Contraceptive Utilization
Department of Midwifery, Mizan-Tepi University, Ethiopia.
*Corresponding Author: Semahegn Tilahun Wassie,Department of Midwifery, Mizan-Tepi University, Ethiopia.
Citation: Semahegn T Wassie. (2023). Repeated Induced Abortion and Trends of Contraceptive Utilization, Journal of Women Health Care and Gynecology, BioRes Scientia publishers. 2(2):1-9. DOI: 10.59657/2993-0871.brs.23.008
Copyright: © 2023 Semahegn Tilahun Wassie, this is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: July 24, 2023 | Accepted: August 18, 2023 | Published: August 21, 2023
Abstract
Worldwide more than 227 million women become pregnant each year, and roughly two-thirds of them deliver live infants. The remaining one-third of pregnancies end in miscarriage, stillbirth, or induced abortion. Following this fact, abortion is a sensitive and public health concern with religious, moral, cultural, and political dimensions. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) Newsroom report, from 2015 to 2019, an average of 73.3 million induced (safe and unsafe) abortions occurred worldwide each year and approximately 45% of all abortions worldwide were unsafe. There were 39 induced abortions per 1000 women aged between 15–49 years. Risk is greater for women in areas of high fertility because they are pregnant more often and therefore face the risks of pregnancy more often than women in areas of low fertility. Of all the regions in the world, Africa has the highest number of abortion-related deaths, estimated at more than 15,000 in 2017, accounting for 7% of pregnancy-related deaths.
Keywords: abortion; contraceptive utilization; reproductive age groups; female; fertility time
Introduction
Worldwide more than 227 million women become pregnant each year, and roughly two-thirds of them deliver live infants. The remaining one-third of pregnancies end in miscarriage, stillbirth, or induced abortion[1]. Following this fact, abortion is a sensitive and public health concern with religious, moral, cultural, and political dimensions [1, 2]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) Newsroom report, from 2015 to 2019, an average of 73.3 million induced (safe and unsafe) abortions occurred worldwide each year and approximately 45% of all abortions worldwide were unsafe. There were 39 induced abortions per 1000 women aged between 15–49 years [3]. Risk is greater for women in areas of high fertility because they are pregnant more often and therefore face the risks of pregnancy more often than women in areas of low fertility [1, 4-6]. Of all the regions in the world, Africa has the highest number of abortion-related deaths, estimated at more than 15,000 in 2017, accounting for 7% of pregnancy-related deaths [1].
The prevalence of repeated induced abortion varies across the world with different causative factors; 43.1-65.2% % in Northwest China, 30.1% in Switzerland, 70% in Georgia, 50% in France [2, 4, 7, 8]. The magnitude of a repeated abortion ranges from 20.3% to 33.5
Methods
Study period, design, and area
Quantitative institution-based cross-sectional study design was applied. The study was conducted from September 1st, 2022 to May 30th, 2023 in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH). It is located 561 km away from Addis Ababa, the center of Ethiopia.
Source population: All females who utilize public health institutions in Bench-Sheko Zone for abortion services.
Study population: All females who utilize MTUTH for abortion services during the study period.
Sample size calculation and sampling technique
Sample size calculation: the sample size was determined by using a single population proportion formula using a basic assumption of 95% confidence level, 5% margin of error, and proportion (P=20.3%), which was the proportion of repeated abortion in Central Ethiopia(Debre Birhan) [9]. Using the formula
Where: n = Sample size= 373, Z = Confidence level which is 95%, P = Proportion= 41.44%, d = the margin of error taken as 5%, But, since the catchment areas population is,10,000 the adjusted sample size will be the final sample size(nf);
, , addig five percent non-response = 221
This was taken as the final minimum sample size. The sample sizes calculated for the second objective (factors associated with repeated abortion in the previous studies) yielded smaller sample sizes.
Sampling technique and Data collection procedure
A consecutive sampling technique was used to select the study subjects. Two BSc midwives from two health centers (outside of the study area) were assigned for the data collection after having two days of training on how to collect the data and research ethics. The data was collected using a pre-tested interviewer-administered structured questionnaire from a total of 211 mothers who were coming for abortion service utilization from September 1st, 2022 to May 30th, 2023 in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH). The interview was implemented after informing the participants all about the ethical issues and gaining informed consent. The questionnaire was adopted and modified from different works of pieces of literature addressing the socio-demographics, the pregnancy and abortion history, and the trends of contraceptive use.
Operational definitions
Abortion: is the termination of pregnancy before viability of the fetus
Safe abortion: when the abortion is carried out by a person with the necessary skills, using a WHO-recommended method appropriate to the pregnancy duration
Unsafe abortion: when it is carried out either by a person lacking the necessary skills or in an environment that does not conform to minimal medical standards or both.
Repeated induced abortion: if the woman has more than one induced abortion.
Data processing and analysis
The entire collected data have been checked for completeness and clarity, cleaned manually, coded, and entered into Epi Data 3.02 then transferred to SPSS version 21 statistical package to be cleaned, edited, and analyzed by the principal investigator for further analysis. Frequencies and percentages have been used to summarize descriptive statistics, tables and charts are also used for data presentation. Bivariate logistic regression has been done to determine the association between each independent variable with the dependent variable. Variables with a p-value less than 0.05 were considered as statistically significant and AOR with 95% CI has been used to control for possible confounders and to interpret the result.
Results
Socio-demographic characteristics
Among the total of 211 females with a 96% response rate who were in the health institution at the comprehensive abortion care unit seeking abortion care, most of them were in the age group of 21 to 34 years old with a mean age of 24.24 years old. The majority of the participants 120(56.9%) were urban dwellers, 64.9 % are the Bench ethnicity, 84939.8) were students, 148(70.1) have low income, and 59(28%) have completed a college diploma and above.
Table 1: The distribution of socio-demographic characteristics of females who have an abortion in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH), 2022/23 (N=211).
Variables | Frequency | Percent (%) |
Age in years | ||
<18> | 12 | 15.7 |
18-21 | 21 | 27 |
21-34 | 134 | 63.5 |
≥ 35 | 8 | 3.8 |
Residence | ||
Urban | 120 | 56.9 |
Rural | 91 | 43.1 |
Ethnicity | ||
Bench | 137 | 64.9 |
Kaffa | 48 | 22.7 |
Amara | 9 | 4.3 |
Oromo | 17 | 8.1 |
Marital status | ||
Married | 41 | 19.4 |
Single (never married) | 144 | 68.2 |
Divorced | 26 | 12.3 |
Duration of marriage(N=67) | ||
≤1year | 4 | 6 |
>1year | 63 | 96 |
Age at marriage (N=67) | ||
<18> | 9 | 13.4 |
≥18 | 68 | 86.6 |
Occupation: | ||
Housewife | 31 | 14.7 |
student | 84 | 39.8 |
Government employee | 45 | 21.3 |
Private employee | 28 | 13.3 |
Prostitute | 21 | 10 |
Others (daily laborers) | 2 | 0.9 |
Educational status | ||
Unable to read and write | 42 | 19.9 |
Can read and write | 37 | 17.5 |
Elementary school | 23 | 10.9 |
Secondary school | 50 | 23.7 |
College diploma and above | 59 | 28 |
Monthly Income | ||
Lower income (≤3250 ETB) | 148 | 70.1 |
Middle income (3251-5000 ETB) | 17 | 8.1 |
Higher income (>5000 ETB) | 46 | 21.8 |
The pregnancy and abortion history
The majority of participant females 101(47.9) have a history of pregnancy, 71(62.8) have last pregnancy of less than one year. Of all the participants, 96(45.5%) have an abortion history with one to three times frequently in their lifetime. Among females with an abortion history, most of them 34(35.4%) reasoned out for the reason for their abortion was being single.
Table 2: Pregnancy and Abortion related history of the women seeking an abortion in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH), 2022/23 (N=211).
Variables | Frequency | Percent (%) |
Had pregnancy history | ||
Yes | 110 | 52.1 |
No | 101 | 47.9 |
Last pregnancy time(N=113) | ||
≤1year | 71 | 62.8 |
>1year | 42 | 37.2 |
History of abortion | ||
Yes | 96 | 45.5 |
No | 115 | 54.5 |
Number of abortions(N=96) | ||
One time | 66 | 68.8 |
Two times | 19 | 19.8 |
Three times | 11 | 11.5 |
How many of it induced? (N=96) | ||
Once | 69 | 71.9 |
Twice | 23 | 24 |
Three times | 4 | 4.2 |
Reason for the abortion(N=96) | ||
Being single | 34 | 35.4 |
Being student | 31 | 32.3 |
Unemployment | 12 | 12.5 |
Wanting to space | 12 | 12.5 |
Being prostitute | 7 | 7.3 |
Last abortion(N=96) | ||
≤1year | 75 | 78.1 |
>1year | 21 | 21 |
Who did the abortion? (N=96) | ||
Trained person | 44 | 45.8 |
Untrained person | 29 | 30.2 |
Myself | 23 | 24 |
The method used for the abortion(N=96) | ||
Medication | 51 | 53.1 |
MVA | 4 | 4.2 |
Herbal | 41 | 42.7 |
Place of the abortion service(N=96) | ||
Public health institution | 38 | 39.6 |
Private clinic | 6 | 6.3 |
Home | 52 | 24.6 |
Price paid for abortion services(N=96) | ||
≤1000 ETB | 90 | 93.8 |
>1000ETB | 6 | 6.3 |
Was this pregnancy wanted? | ||
Yes | 5 | 2.4 |
No | 206 | 97.6 |
How did it happen? | ||
Casual | 144 | 68.2 |
Rape | 10 | 4.2 |
Incest | 9 | 4.3 |
Contraceptive failure | 48 | 22.7 |
The reason for coming to the health institution | ||
I don’t want another child | 104 | 49.3 |
Economic problem | 19 | 9 |
To continue my education | 66 | 31.3 |
I want to space | 5 | 2.4 |
I am divorced | 15 | 7.1 |
Health problem | 2 | 0.9 |
The trends of contraceptive use
Even if the whole participants had a piece of information about modern family planning methods of contraceptives, 4.3% of the participants didn’t use modern contraceptives. However, 48(22.7%) of the participants didn’t hear about emergency contraceptives and 167(79.1%) didn’t use emergency contraceptives in their experience of contraceptive use because the majority of respondents 94(56.3%) fear sterility.
Table 3: The trends of contraceptive use of women seeking an abortion in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH), 2022/23 (N=211).
Variables | Frequency | Percent (%) |
Did you ever hear about modern contraceptives/? | ||
Yes | 211 | 100 |
No | 0 | 0 |
If “Yes”, where did you hear it? | ||
Family | 63 | 29.9 |
School | 47 | 22.3 |
Nearby friends | 33 | 15.6 |
Mass-media | 68 | 32.2 |
Which type of contraceptive methods do you know? | ||
Pills | 39 | 18.5 |
Injectable | 62 | 29.4 |
Loop | 13 | 6.2 |
Implants | 7 | 3.3 |
condom | 11 | 5.2 |
All of these listed | 79 | 37.4 |
Do you think the contraceptive you use is accessible? | ||
Yes | 159 | 75.4 |
No | 52 | 52 |
You and others around you, where did you access it? | ||
Health center | 91 | 43.1 |
Hospital | 27 | 12.8 |
Private clinic | 86 | 40.8 |
Mari stops | 7 | 3.3 |
Have you ever used contraceptives? | ||
Yes | 202 | 95.7 |
No | 9 | 4.3 |
If “No” why? (N=9) | ||
Unaware | 7 | 95.7 |
Not accessible | 2 | 4.3 |
If “Yes” which type, do you use? | ||
Pills | 84 | 38.4 |
Injectable | 95 | 45 |
Loop | 3 | 1.4 |
Condom | 12 | 5.7 |
Implants | 9 | 4.3 |
Others | 11 | 5.2 |
For how long-duration did you use it? (N =201) | ||
≤1year | 108 | 53.7 |
1.1-3 years | 55 | 27.4 |
>3years | 38 | 18.9 |
Have you ever heard about emergency contraceptives? | ||
Ye | 163 | 77.3 |
No | 48 | 22.7 |
If “Yes” which type, do you know? (N=163) | ||
Pills | 163 | 100 |
Other than pills | 0 | 0 |
How does it work? | ||
Prevent pregnancy | 131 | 62.1 |
Abortion | 5 | 2.4 |
No idea | 75 | 35.5 |
Did you ever use it? | ||
Yes | 44 | 20.9 |
No | 167 | 79.1 |
If “No” why? (N=167) | ||
Not accessible | 6 | 3.6 |
Fear of side effects | 18 | 10.8 |
Fear of sterility | 94 | 56.3 |
Forgot it | 2 | 1.2 |
No idea | 47 | 28.1 |
The magnitude of repeated abortion
Among 211 of all the participants, 96(45.5%) have an abortion history with one to three times in their lifetime experience with the mean range of 38.9% to 52.1%.
Factors associated with repeated abortion
In this study, from the variables entered to bivariate analysis; Educational status, Marital status, types of contraceptives used, duration of FP use, the occurrence of the pregnancy, and ever use of emergency contraceptives were associated with repeated abortion. After transferring to multivariable analysis; Educational status, types of contraceptives used, duration of FP use, the way pregnancy occurred, and ever use of emergency contraceptives were associated with repeated abortion was statistically significant. Repeated abortion was nearly five times AOR=4.767 (1.159-19.603) likely to be done within females with the academic status of those able to read and write than that of females with a college diploma and above. Besides, participants those used implants AOR=0.007(0.001-0.89) and other contraceptives like calendar method and cultural methods AOR=0.0030(0.004-0.2160) are more protected from committing repeated abortion than those used oral contraceptive pills. The participants who use family planning contraceptives less than one-year duration are six-folds AOR= 5.771(1.418-23.478) prone to commit or practice repeated abortion as compared to those used beyond two years. The same was true for those participants who have a practice of using emergency contraceptives; participants who have a history of using emergency contraceptive pills have more chance of committing repeated abortion AOR= 0.088(0.23-0.338).
Table 4: The logistic regression analysis of factors associated with repeated abortion among women seeking an abortion in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital (MTUTH), 2022/23 (N=211).
History Of abortion | ||||
Variables | Yes | No | COR (95% CI) | AOR (95% CI) |
Educational status | ||||
Unable to read and write | 37 | 5 | 0.69(0.024-0.204) | 0.031(0.007-0.146) ** |
Can read and write | 17 | 20 | 0.603(0.260-1.400) | 4.767(1.159-19.603) * |
Elementary school | 3 | 20 | 3.419(0.906-12.899) | 2.935(0.452-19.070) |
Secondary school | 19 | 31 | 0.837(0.382-1.835) | 0.477(0.144-1.582) |
College diploma and above® | 20 | 39 | ||
Marital status | ||||
Married® | 27 | 14 | ||
Single(never married) | 55 | 89 | 0.605(0.221-1.654) | 1.973(0.509-7.652) |
Divorced | 14 | 12 | 1.888(0.814-4.378) | 0.988(0.203-4.805) |
Types of contraceptives used | ||||
Pills ® | 32 | 49 | ||
Injectable | 35 | 60 | 3.53(0.860-14.840) | 1.058(0.403-2.777) |
Loop | 2 | 1 | 4.00(0.971-16.471) | 2.013(0.003-14.158480) |
Condom | 13 | 0 | 1.167(0.74-18.346) | 0.000(0.000) |
Implants | 7 | 2 | 0.000(0.000) | 0.007(0.001-0.89) ** |
Others | 7 | 3 | 0.667(0.084-5.301) | 0.030(0.004-0.2160) ** |
Duration of FP use (N =201) | ||||
≤1year | 37 | 71 | 1(0.458-2.175) | 5.771(1.418-23.478) * |
>1-3 years | 37 | 18 | 0.253(0.105-0.607) | 0.442(0.123-1.582) |
>3years® | 13 | 25 | ||
Occurrence of the pregnancy | ||||
Casual | 67 | 77 | 0.690(0.353-1.347 | 0.163(0.49-0.546) |
Rape | 9 | 1 | 0.067(0.008-0.571) | 0.000(0.000) |
Incest | 2 | 7 | 2.100(0.393-11.229) | 0.100(0.006-0.1773) |
Contraceptive failure® | 18 | 30 | ||
Did you ever use it? | ||||
Yes | 16 | 28 | ||
No | 80 | 87 | 1.609(0.811-3.193) | 0.088(0.23-0.338) ** |
NB: *= significant at P-Value< 0 COR =crud xss=removed CI=Confidence xss=removed>Other contraceptive = traditional methods like calendar method and herbals
Discussion
This study tried to emanate with the magnitude and causative environs of repeated abortion among females who came for seeking an abortion at Comprehensive Abortion Care (CAC) unit in public health institutions in Bench-Sheko Zone, South West Ethiopia.
The magnitude of repeated abortion in this study area was very high when compared to most of the studies conducted in different countries: 0.8% among unmarried women in China, 23.4% in the Grampian region of Scotland and the Uk, 24% in Swedish, 30.1% in Switzerland, 33% in Alsace [6, 14, 18-20]. On the contrary, the magnitude is lower than the studies conducted in Northwest China (56.6%), in 30 provinces of China (65.2%), in Georgia 70%) [7, 8, 21]. But, this finding was in line with the magnitudes of repeated abortion found in Aquitaine France (41.3%), and a systematic analysis finding among Chinese women (43.1%) [4, 22].
The magnitude found in this study was the highest magnitude among the studies conducted in Ethiopia in different parts of the country; 20.3% in central Ethiopia (Debrebirhan Town), 33.6% in Addis Ababa at Marie Stops Clinic, and 29.93% with the findings of systematic analysis [9-11]. This variation may be due to regional disparities and tendencies of contraceptive use.
The educational background females at the level of reading and writing are five times more likely to commit repeated abortion than those of females with an educational background of college diploma and above. This finding is supported by the study conducted in Addis Ababa at Marie Stops International Clinic in Ethiopia [10], a systematic and meta-analysis conducted in Ethiopia [11], another systematic and meta-analysis conducted among Chinese females [4], and in Northwestern China [7]. This may be due to the reason that literacy is a key for having awareness towards appropriate utilization of different types of contraceptives. It is also known that both Ethiopia and China are amongst high fertility rates and highly populated countries. Females with a history of contraceptive use like implants and traditional methods like calendar method and herbals have a negative association with repeated abortion. This finding is similar to the study conducted in the Grampian region of Scotland, the UK stated that females who use implants were safer than those who didn’t use them [14].
Participants who used contraceptives for less than one year of duration are nearly six times more prone to have repeated abortion than those females who used contraceptives for three and more than three years. This may be due to the reason that most of the participants have no the trend to use long-acting family planning contraceptives. Instead, most of the participants (38.4%) used oral contraceptive pills.
Those females who have the practice and utilization of emergency contraceptives have likely history of repeated abortion than those who have no history of emergency contraceptive use. This may be due to the reason that those women have the trend of using other methods of contraceptives and most of them didn’t use it for the complaining of side effects like infertility. Besides those who are using contraceptives responded that they have used it correctly, but their appropriate use of contraceptives was not measured except their response during the interview.
Limitations of the study
Repeated abortion is rare and somehow sensitive for social and cultural aspects, and this makes it difficult to accommodate a large sample size. To have a large nationwide sample size, it needs a fundraise and this study was not funded. Because of the small sample size, the cross-tabulation of the regression table has a value of fewer than five frequencies and this may make the regression to be affected. Therefore, it needs another research with a large sample size to be conducted. It is also better if we have included more than one referral hospital for generalization.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The magnitude of repeated abortion was high and the trends of emergency contraceptive utilization were too low for the claim of infertility. The females with college diplomas and above, those who used implants and other contraceptives like calendar method and cultural methods are more protected from committing repeated abortion than those who used oral contraceptive pills. The participants who use family planning contraceptives less than one-year duration and those with the practice of using emergency contraceptives are prone to commit or practice repeated abortion.
The trends of contraceptive usage should be a focus of intervention for the ideal tackling of this highly prevalent practice of repeated abortion. There should be a tough intervention regarding the repeated abortion and utilization of contraceptives, especially the attitude towards emergency contraceptives.
Abbreviations
AOR: Adjusted Odd Ratio, BSc: Bachelor Science, COR: Crude odd ratio, ETB: Ethiopian Birr, FHB/R, FP: Family Planning, MTUTH: Mizan-Tepi University Teaching Hospital, SNNPR: South Nations, Nationalities and peoples Region, SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Science, UK: the United Kingdom, WHO: World Health Organization
Declarations
Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of interest statement: The author declares no conflict of interest in preparing this article.
Author’s contributions: STW conceptualized the study, drafted the manuscript, and analyzed the data.
Acknowledgment: I profoundly thank Mizan-Tepi University (MTU) for the proof of ethical review. Also, I would like to thank the MTUTH Chief executive director's office. Eventually, I would like to give a great thank you to all our friends who were around me while I was in the duty of this study.
References
- Mesce D. (2021). Abortion facts and figures.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Leeners B, Bieli S, Huang D, Tschudin S. (2017). Why prevention of repeat abortion is so challenging: psychosocial characteristics of women at risk. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 22(1):38-44.
Publisher | Google Scholor - (2020). Organization (WHO) WH. Preventing unsafe abortion.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Liu J, Duan Z, Zhang H, Wen C, Tang L, Pei K, et al. (2021). Prevalence and risk factors for repeat induced abortion among Chinese women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 1-10.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Rodriguez-Alvarez E, Borrell LN, González-Rábago Y, Martín U, Lanborena N. (2016). Induced abortion in a southern European region: examining inequalities between native and immigrant women. International journal of public health, 61(7):829-836.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Pinton A, Hanser A, Metten M, Nisand I, Bettahar K. (2017). Is there any relation between couple violence and repeated medical abortion? Gynécologie, obstétrique, fertilité & sénologie, 45(7-8):416-420.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Li C, Gao J, Liu J. (2021). Repeat abortion and associated factors among women seeking abortion services in northwestern China: a cross-sectional study. BMC public health, 21(1):1-11.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Luo H, Wu S, Wang K, Xu J, Tang L, Temmerman M, et al. (2021). Repeat induced abortion in 30 Chinese provinces: A cross‐sectional study. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Behulu GK, Fenta EA, Aynalem GL. (2019). Repeat induced abortion and associated factors among reproductive age women who seek abortion services in Debre Berhan town health institutions, Central Ethiopia, 2019. BMC research notes, 12(1):1-5.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Alemayehu B, Addissie A, Ayele W, Tiroro S, Woldeyohannes D. (2019). Magnitude and associated factors of repeat induced abortion among reproductive age group women who seeks abortion Care Services at Marie Stopes International Ethiopia Clinics in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Reprod Health, 16(1):1-10.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Mekie M, Addisu D, Dagnew E, Necho W. (2021). The level and deriving factors of repeat-induced abortion in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon, 7(1):05984.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Alemayehu M, Yebyo H, Medhanyie AA, Bayray A, Fantahun M, Goba GK. (2017). Determinants of repeated abortion among women of reproductive age attending health facilities in Northern Ethiopia: a case–control study. BMC Public Health, 17(1):1-8.
Publisher | Google Scholor - LaRoche KJ, Foster AM. (2018). Exploring Canadian women's multiple abortion experiences: implications for reducing stigma and improving patient-centered care. Women's Health Issues, 28(4):327-332.
Publisher | Google Scholor - McCall SJ, Flett G, Okpo E, Bhattacharya S. (2016). Who has a repeat abortion? Identifying women at risk of repeated terminations of pregnancy: analysis of routinely collected health care data. Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care, 42(2):133-142.
Publisher | Google Scholor - L'Heudé A, Gobenceaux A, Machuron F, Toullalan O, Azuar A, Delotte J. (2019). Contraceptive prescriptions following repeated volontary induced abortions. Gynecologie, obstetrique, fertilite & senologie, 47(7-8):574-581.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Stoicescu M, Bungău SG, Ţiţ DM, Muţiu G, Purza AL, Iovan VC, et al. (2017). Carcinogenic uterine risk of repeated abortions: hormone receptors tumoral expression. Rom J Morphol Embryol, 58(4):1429-1434.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Wang L, Zhang Y, Wang H, Li H, Zhao Z, Wang N, et al. (2018). Repeated abortion in adulthood induces cognition impairment in aged mice. Scientific reports, 8(1):11396.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Guo C, Pang L, Wen X, Zheng X. (2019). Risky sexual behaviors and repeat induced abortion among unmarried young women in China: Results from a large, nationwide, population-based sample. Journal of Women's Health, 28(10):1442-1449.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Heino A, Niinimäki M, Mentula M, Gissler M. (2018). How reliable are health registers? Registration of induced abortions and sterilizations in Finland. Informatics for Health and Social Care, 43(3):310-319.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Kilander H, Alehagen S, Svedlund L, Westlund K, Thor J, Brynhildsen J. (2016). Likelihood of repeat abortion in a Swedish cohort according to the choice of post‐abortion contraception: a longitudinal study. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 95(5):565-571.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Pestvenidze E, Berdzuli N, Lomia N, Gagua T, Umikashvili L, Stray-Pedersen B. (2016). Repeat induced abortions in Georgia, characteristics of women with multiple pregnancy terminations: secondary analysis of the Reproductive Health Survey 2010. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 205:85-90.
Publisher | Google Scholor - Haddad S, Martin-Marchand L, Lafaysse M, Saurel-Cubizolles M-J. (2021). Repeat induced abortion and adverse childhood experiences in Aquitaine, France: a cross-sectional survey. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 26(1):29-35.
Publisher | Google Scholor