4.3 Review

Reproductive and pregnancy health care for women with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A scoping review

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jar.12977

Keywords

family planning; fertility; intellectual and developmental disabilities; midwife; prenatal care

Funding

  1. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [R03HD099619]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities experience poorer reproductive and pregnancy outcomes due to health care inequity. They have lower fertility rates, less access to sexual education, and receive prenatal care later and less frequently compared to their peers. The gaps in understanding this issue hinder efforts to reduce health disparities for these women.
Background Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities face poorer reproductive and pregnancy outcomes partially due to health care inequity. Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of reproductive and pregnancy related health care among women with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Methods We systematically reviewed three databases for keywords pertaining to pregnancy, reproductive health, and intellectual and developmental disabilities. Two reviewers screened abstracts and extracted full text. We synthesised included papers, identifying common themes. Results Thirty-six papers met review criteria. Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities had lower fertility rates and were less likely to receive adequate sexual education compared to peers. While most women received prenatal care, uptake was lower and received later than women without intellectual and developmental disabilities. Conclusions Pregnancy-related health care is often lacking for women with intellectual and developmental disabilities. There are gaps inhibiting our understanding which prevents action to reduce health disparities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available