↓ Skip to main content

Sexual and reproductive healthcare for women asylum seekers in Switzerland: a multi-method evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sexual and reproductive healthcare for women asylum seekers in Switzerland: a multi-method evaluation
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3502-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva Cignacco, Friederike zu Sayn-Wittgenstein, Coline Sénac, Anja Hurni, Doris Wyssmüller, Jean Anthony Grand-Guillaume-Perrenoud, Anke Berger

Abstract

Forced migration significantly endangers health. Women face numerous health risks, including sexual violence, lack of contraception, sexually transmitted disease, and adverse perinatal outcomes. Therefore, sexual and reproductive healthcare is a significant aspect of women asylum seekers' health. Even when healthcare costs of asylum seekers are covered by the government, there may be strong barriers to healthcare access and specific needs may be addressed inadequately. The study's objectives were a) to assess the accommodation and healthcare services provided to women asylum seekers in standard and specialised health care, b) to assess the organisation of healthcare provision and how it addresses the sexual and reproductive healthcare needs of women asylum seekers. The study utilised a multi-method approach, comprising a less-dominant quantitative component and dominant qualitative component. The quantitative component assessed accommodation conditions for women in eight asylum centres using a survey. The qualitative component assessed healthcare provision on-site, using semi-structured interviews with health and social care professionals (n = 9). Asylum centres were selected to cover a wide range of characteristics. Interview analysis was guided by thematic analysis. The accommodation in the asylum centres provided gender-separate rooms and sanitary infrastructure. Two models of healthcare were identified, which differed in the services they provided and in their organisation: 1) a standard healthcare model characterised by a lack of coordination between healthcare providers, unavailability of essential services such as interpreters, and fragmented healthcare, and 2) a specialised healthcare model specifically tailored to the needs of asylum-seekers. Its organisation is characterised by a network of closely collaborating health professionals. It provided essential services not present in the standard model. We recommend the specialised healthcare model as a guideline for best practise. The standard, non-specialised healthcare model used in some regions in Switzerland does not fully meet the healthcare needs of women asylum seekers. Specialised healthcare services used in other regions, which include translation services as well as gender and culturally sensitive care, are better suited to address these needs. More widespread use of this model would contribute significantly toward protecting the sexual and reproductive integrity and health of women asylum seekers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 19%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Researcher 7 6%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 40 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 14%
Psychology 15 13%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Unspecified 6 5%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 43 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 January 2020.
All research outputs
#13,855,955
of 24,526,614 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,596
of 8,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,896
of 341,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#122
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,526,614 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.