Induced Abortion and Unintended Pregnancy In Guatemala
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: Although Guatemalan law permits induced abortion only to save a woman's life, many women obtain abortions, often under unsafe conditions and in response to an unintended pregnancy. Recent studies indicate that unsafe abortion is a key factor contributing to maternal morbidity and mortality in the country, but no national data on the incidence of abortion exist. METHODS: Surveys of all hospitals that treat women for postabortion complications and of 74 professionals who are knowledgeable about the conditions of abortion provision in Guatemala were conducted in 2003. Indirect estimation techniques were used to calculate the number of induced abortions performed annually. Abortion rates and ratios and the level of unintended pregnancy were calculated for the nation and its eight regions. RESULTS: Nearly 65,000 induced abortions are performed annually in Guatemala, and about 21,600 women are hospitalized for treatment of complications. Abortions occur at a rate of 24 per 1,000 women aged 15-49, and there is one abortion for every six births. The abortion rate is higher than average in the Southwest (less developed, mainly indigenous population) and Metropolitan (more developed, mainly nonindigenous population) regions (29-30 per 1,000 women). Over a quarter of all births are unplanned; combining unplanned births with abortions yields estimates that 32% of pregnancies in Guatemala are unintended, with an unintended pregnancy rate of 66 per 1,000 women. CONCLUSIONS: Unsafe abortion has a significant impact on women's health in Guatemala. Comprehensive government programs are needed to address the issues of unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion, with attention to regional differences.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In Guatemala, unsafe abortions occur at a rate of 24 per 1000 women, and there is one abortion for every six births.
“Likewise, in Guatemala, although law permits induced abortion only to save a woman's life, unsafe abortions occur at a rate of 24, and there is one abortion for every six births (9).”
From Unsafe abortion and postabortion care - an overview (2011) · cites this paper as [9]
The Abortion Incidence section estimates 24 induced abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–49 and approximately one induced abortion for every six births. The Discussion describes abortion provision in Guatemala as very unsafe, but the paper does not identify the 24-per-1,000 figure specifically as a rate of unsafe abortions; it is the estimated rate of all induced abortions. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Incidence of Induced Abortion in the Philippines: Current Level and Recent Trends
Juarez, F., Cabigon, J., Singh, S., & Hussain, R. (2005) · International Family Planning Perspectives · doi:10.1363/3114005 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Self-citationScaling up post-abortion care in Guatemala: initial successes at national level
Kestler, E., Valencia, L., Del Valle, V., & Silva, A. (2006) · Reproductive Health Matters · doi:10.1016/s0968-8080(06)27235-5 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Kestler E and Ramírez L, Pregnancy-related mortality in Guatemala, 1993-1996, Pan American Journal of Public Health, 2000, 7(1):41-46.
- Singh S and Wulf D, Estimated levels of induced abortion in six Latin American countries, International Family Planning Perspectives, 1994, 20(1):4-13;
- and Singh S et al., The incidence of induced abor- tion in Uganda, International Family Planning Perspectives, 2005, 31(4):183-191.
- Henshaw SK et al., The incidence of induced abortion in Nigeria, International Family Planning Perspectives, 1998, 24(4):156-164;
- Singh S et al., Estimating the level of abortion in the Philippines and Bangladesh, International Family Planning Perspectives, 1997, 23(3): 100-107;
- Bongaarts J and Potter RG, Fertility, Biology and Behavior: An Analysis of the Proximate Determinants, New York: Academic Press, 1983, p. 39;
- and Harlap S, Shiono PH and Ramcharan S, A life table of spontaneous abortions and the effects of age, parity and other variables, in: Hook EB and Porter I, eds., Human Embryonic and Fetal Death, New York: Academic Press, 1980, Table 1, pp. 148 & 157.
- Armijo R and Monreal T, Epidemiology of provoked abortion in Santiago, Chile, in: Muramatsu M and Harper PA, eds., Population Dynamics: International Action and Training Programs, Baltimore, MD, USA: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1965, pp. 137-160.
- Rossier C, Estimating induced abortion rates: a review, Studies in Family Planning, 2003, 34(2):87-102.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unsafe abortion and postabortion care - an overview
RASCH, V. (2011) · Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0412.2011.01165.x · Cited by 94 · see citing works
- Authors
- Singh, S., Prada, E., & Kestler, E.
- Affiliations
- Guttmacher Institute (US)
- ORCID
- Singh, Susheela
- Venue
- International Family Planning Perspectives
- Publisher
- Guttmacher Institute
- Published
- 2006-09
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 03
- Pages
- 136-145
- ISSN
- 0190-3187 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039132862
- Cited by
- 61
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Family Planning Perspectives (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- World Bank Group
- Department for International Development
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Human Rights and Reproductive Law
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Global Maternal and Child Health
- Keywords
- abortion, unintended pregnancy, unsafe abortion, abortion rates, maternal morbidity, maternal mortality, abortion law, regional disparities, indigenous peoples, Guatemala
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Induced, Adolescent, Adult, Contraceptive Agents, Female, Family Planning Services, Female, Guatemala, Hospitals, Public, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Middle Aged, Postoperative Complications, Pregnancy, Surveys and Questionnaires, Safety, Incidence, Hospitals, Private, Health Care Surveys, Pregnancy, Unplanned
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
