↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative analysis of psychosocial outcomes among women with sexual violence-related pregnancies in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Mental Health Systems, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 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
A qualitative analysis of psychosocial outcomes among women with sexual violence-related pregnancies in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo
Published in
International Journal of Mental Health Systems, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13033-017-0171-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Scott, Colleen Mullen, Shada Rouhani, Philipp Kuwert, Ashley Greiner, Katherine Albutt, Gillian Burkhardt, Monica Onyango, Michael VanRooyen, Susan Bartels

Abstract

Sexual violence is prevalent in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and has potentially devastating psychosocial consequences. Previous studies have reported on sexual violence and its impact on the mental health of survivors, but there are few studies conducted among women with sexual violence-related pregnancies (SVRPs). Women with SVRPs may be at greater risk of complex psychosocial outcomes, including social stigmatization. This study aimed to describe psychosocial outcomes among this subgroup of sexual violence survivors in order to inform future interventions. A mixed methods study was conducted in Bukavu, DRC in 2012 among adult women who self-reported an SVRP and either (1) were currently raising a child from an SVRP (parenting group) or (2) had terminated an SVRP (termination group). This manuscript presents qualitative findings from the mixed methods study. Participants were recruited using respondent-driven sampling and a proportion engaged in semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted by trained female interviewers. Thematic content analysis was conducted and key themes were identified. In total, 55 women were interviewed, of whom 38 were in the parenting group and 17 in the termination group. Women with SVRPs experienced a myriad of emotional responses as they navigated their social environments following the SVRPs. Negative reactions, including social stigmatization and/or social rejection, toward women with SVRPs and toward children born from SVRPs were important influences on psychological well-being. Women expressed both internalized emotionality intertwined with externalized experiences in the social environment. Many women demonstrated resilience, or what could be termed post-traumatic growth, identifying avenues of agency to advance the social conditions for women. The findings from the qualitative study, and in particular, the respondents' needs and suggested strategies, may be useful to inform future research, programs, and policies for women with SVRPs in eastern DRC. Future research could move beyond cross-sectional assessments to utilize innovative research methodologies to assess processes of psychological adaptation among women with SVRPs. Multi-dimensional psychosocial programs for women with SVRPs should consider basic needs such as shelter, food, and health care within the broader framework of trauma-informed care. Participatory programming, guided by beneficiaries, could provide further avenues for agency to advance social conditions for women with SVRPs in eastern DRC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 195 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 14%
Researcher 25 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 8%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 74 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 12%
Social Sciences 19 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 2%
Other 14 7%
Unknown 80 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 13 April 2020.
All research outputs
#1,614,624
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#61
of 719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,017
of 327,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 327,016 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.