Skip to main content
Download PDF

The influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health outcomes: a systematic review

BMC Women's Health volume 25, Article number: 224 (2025) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Despite progress toward gender equity, enduring societal norms continue to shape women's roles, particularly impacting their sexual and reproductive health, including fertility, maternal health, and family planning, all of which are influenced by traditional gender expectations.

Aim

This review investigates how gender norms affect women's sexual and reproductive health outcomes.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted on publications from 2013 to 2023, sourced from databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, using keywords, MeSH terms, and Boolean operators. Of 1,500 articles identified, 38 peer-reviewed articles in English or French met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a standardized form and evaluated with the mixed-methods appraisal tool. Findings from the selected studies were analyzed through a narrative synthesis approach.

Findings

The review identified key themes from the 38 included studies results underscoring the lack of comprehensive sexual education and the challenges posed by cultural norms and social stigma. It highlighted how cultural and gender dynamics restrict women's autonomy in family planning and maternal healthcare, with impacts varying by context. Finding also highlight the importance of culturally competent healthcare that respects diverse cultural beliefs and tackles educational and economic barriers to enhance women's sexual and reproductive health outcomes.

Conclusion

This review identifies gender norms as one of major obstacles to accessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) education and services among women. It emphasizes the need for comprehensive SRH education, women’s autonomy, and culturally competent healthcare services to address barriers and promote gender equity globally.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Gender roles have long been a fundamental aspect of societal norms, shaping the expectations, behaviors, and opportunities of individuals based on their gender. Historically, women have been assigned specific roles in many cultures, often centering around domestic responsibilities and caregiving [1]. While progress has been made towards gender equity in various aspects of life, deeply ingrained gender norms continue to influence the lives of women, particularly concerning their sexual and reproductive health [2].

Since the Beijing Declaration, it was asserted that the right of women to achieve the highest standard of health throughout their lives, on equal terms with men, is essential. This commitment highlighted the crucial importance of gender equity in health access [3]. However, despite international commitments, significant disparities persist, often exacerbated by traditional social structures and gender norms that perpetuate these inequalities, particularly in the realm of sexual and reproductive health [4].

Sexual and reproductive health is a critical aspect of overall well-being for women worldwide. It encompasses a range of issues related to the female reproductive system, including fertility, maternal health, access to family planning services, and the management of reproductive-related conditions [5]. However, the link between gender roles and women's sexual and reproductive health is complex and multifaceted, and understanding the dynamics between the two is crucial for promoting equitable healthcare and addressing potential disparities [6].

Universal access to reliable information and comprehensive sexual health care is crucial. This includes access to high-quality information about sex and sexuality, understanding the risks associated with unprotected sexual activity, the ability to access necessary sexual health care, and living in an environment that supports and promotes sexual health [7]. Moreover, ensuring adequate contraceptive methods, effective protection against sexually transmitted infections, and sufficient support during pregnancy to guarantee safe childbirth and the birth of a healthy child are essential. However, these necessities are often restricted by deeply entrenched gender norms [8, 9]. These limitations expose women to multiple risks such as sexually transmitted infections, unsafe abortions, and unwanted or risky pregnancies [10, 11].

The disparity in education, particularly in sexual and reproductive health education, is critical as approximately 132 million girls worldwide are deprived of education, limiting their ability to access essential information and make informed decisions about their health [12]. Economic inequalities, exacerbated by a lack of financial independence, further hinder women's access to quality care, reinforcing barriers to safe and informed health and reproduction [13].

Gender disparities in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes persist in many societies, affecting access to essential healthcare services and influencing health-seeking behaviors. These disparities can arise from unequal power dynamics, limited decision-making autonomy, and restrictive gender norms that may hinder women’s ability to make informed choices about their reproductive well-being [14, 15]. To better understand these challenges, this systematic review seeks to answer the following question: What is the influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes?.

Prior to conducting this systematic review, we performed a preliminary search to identify existing reviews on the influence of gender norms on women’s SRH outcomes. Our search identified several key reviews, including one that highlighted the exclusion of older women in global health policies [16], another that examined gender norms and health behaviors [17], and a third that provided a methodological framework for gender analysis in health systems research [18]. However, these reviews did not systematically examine the influence of gender norms on SRH outcomes across diverse populations and regions, nor did they provide a comprehensive synthesis of both qualitative and quantitative evidence. Our review aims to fill these gaps by systematically analyzing the impact of gender norms on women’s SRH outcomes globally, with a focus on both qualitative and quantitative studies.

This systematic review comprehensively examines and synthesizes the existing literature on the relationship between gender norms and women’s SRH outcomes. The rationale for this review stems from the critical role that gender norms play in shaping women’s access to and experiences with SRH services. By synthesizing findings from diverse studies, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of how societal expectations, norms, and roles influence women’s SRH outcomes globally. This understanding has significant implications for the development of healthcare policies, programs, and interventions that address the specific needs of women and promote gender equity in SRH.

Methodology

Review question

What is the influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes?

Review objective

To investigate how gender norms affect women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes globally.

Review design

This study employs a systematic review design to synthesize global evidence on how gender norms influence women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes. Given the complex and socially constructed nature of gender norms—and their varied impacts across cultures—this approach is particularly valuable because it:

  • ✓ Identifies patterns in how normative frameworks affect SRH outcomes.

  • ✓ Compares findings across diverse geographic and socio-demographic contexts.

  • ✓ Critically assesses the methodological strengths and limitations of existing evidence.

Systematic reviews follow a structured, reproducible methodology, incorporating predefined eligibility criteria, systematic search strategies, and critical appraisal of included studies to minimize bias and enhance the reliability and generalizability of findings [19]. The design accommodates both qualitative and quantitative evidence, allowing for a comprehensive analysis of gender norms as both measurable outcomes and contextual social processes.

To ensure transparency and methodological rigor, this systematic review adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [20]. While PRISMA standardizes the reporting of key processes (e.g., search strategy, study selection, and data extraction), the systematic review design governs the broader approach to evidence synthesis and interpretation. The completed PRISMA checklist is provided in [Table 3] (Supplementary Materials).

Literature search strategy

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify relevant studies published in electronic databases as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using a combination of relevant keywords, MeSH terms, and Boolean operators. We also performed a hand search of key journals and examined the reference lists of included studies to identify any additional studies that may have been missed in the database search. For keywords we use Gender Role, woman's roles, men's, sex roles, Gender norms, healthcare disparities, health care in equity, reproductive health, and sexual health. The search was limited to studies published between 2013 and 2023 to ensure the inclusion of recent and relevant evidence. This period aligns with key global developments, such as the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, which emphasize gender equality and universal access to SRH services. Specific search equations and filters applied, covering these publications, were detailed in the supplementary materials [Search equation] after the PRISMA item checklist.

Eligibility criteria

To ensure a focused and relevant analysis, our systematic review explicitly includes and excludes studies based on the following refined criteria:

Inclusion criteria

  • ➢ Study Focus: Only studies that directly examine the relationship between gender roles and sexual and reproductive health outcomes in women are included. This encompasses studies that either primarily focus on this relationship or uncover it as a significant finding while investigating barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health services for women.

  • ➢ Type of Research: This review included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies to ensure a comprehensive analysis of the influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes. Qualitative studies provided in-depth insights into how gender norms shape women’s experiences and decision-making, while quantitative studies offered measurable data on their impact. Mixed-methods studies combined the strengths of both approaches, enabling a nuanced understanding of the topic.

  • ➢ Definitions and Operationalization: Studies must provide clear definitions or operational constructs of'gender roles'and'sexual and reproductive health.'

  • ➢ Participant Demographics: All studies included must involve human participants, with data specifically analyzed for female subjects.

  • ➢ Availability and access to full text.

Exclusion criteria

  • ➢ Study Focus: Studies that exclusively focused on male participants or did not provide gender-differentiated results were excluded. This review specifically examines the influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes. Since gender norms affect men and women differently, the exclusion of male-focused studies ensures a focused analysis of their impact on women’s health.

  • ➢ Type of Articles: Excludes review articles, editorials, commentaries, and other non-original research documents.

  • ➢ Language: Studies not available in English or French are excluded to ensure the comprehensibility.

Studies selection

Our systematic review followed a rigorous selection process to identify and include peer-reviewed, full-text articles pertinent to our review objectives. We conducted a comprehensive search across major databases, which yielded 1,500 references. After removing 320 duplicates, we screened 1,180 titles for relevance, excluding 424 on the basis that the intervention was not relevant to this review.

We subsequently assessed 756 abstracts, further excluding 696 studies due to the intervention's irrelevance or lack of moderation or subgroup analysis. This refinement led us to a full-text review of 60 articles, from which 22 were excluded due to their limited availability as conference proceedings, irrelevance of the intervention, or absence of moderation or subgroup analysis.

Ultimately, 38 studies met our inclusion criteria and were incorporated into the review. These studies were selected based on their direct relevance to our review focus and their provision of sufficient detail for inclusion in our analysis. Our process was meticulous and systematic, ensuring a comprehensive and relevant evidence base for our review. The details of our study selection process are succinctly visualized in (Fig. 1) of the PRISMA flow chart.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flow chart

Full size image

Data extraction

A standardized data extraction form was developed to collect relevant information from the included studies. The data extraction form included details such as study characteristics author, year, country, study design, sample size, participants'characteristics, and key findings related to the review question (Table 1). To ensure the reliability and accuracy of the data extraction process, two independent reviewers conducted the data extraction. Both reviewers, independently to minimize bias, and enhance the thoroughness of the data collected, examined each article. Any discrepancies between the reviewers were resolved through discussion or, if necessary, by consulting a third, senior reviewer.

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies
Full size table

Quality assessment

The quality of the 38 studies included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. The MMAT was chosen because it is specifically designed to appraise the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies, making it highly suitable for evaluating the diverse study designs included in this review. For qualitative studies, we used the qualitative criteria to assess methodological coherence, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. For quantitative studies, we applied the relevant quantitative criteria to evaluate study design, sampling, measurement validity, and statistical analysis. For mixed-methods studies, we used the mixed-methods criteria to assess the integration and interpretation of qualitative and quantitative findings [29].

For the assessment, we adopted a descriptor-based scoring system as outlined in the MMAT guidelines, with scores ranging from 1 to 5 (corresponding to 20% to 100% of the criteria met). This scoring approach provided a precise and quantifiable measure of each study’s methodological quality, ensuring a standardized, consistent, and transparent evaluation of methodological rigor across all included studies [30].

Data synthesis

Data from the included studies were synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach, which is particularly effective given the diversity of findings and the complex influence of societal gender norms on women's sexual and reproductive health. This approach involved developing a preliminary synthesis by organizing and summarizing findings, exploring relationships within and across studies to identify key patterns, and assessing the robustness of the synthesis through critical examination of consistency and validity. The process was collaborative and iterative, involving all review team members to ensure a rigorous and nuanced understanding of the data. By presenting the findings in a narrative format, we were able to provide a coherent and contextualized account of how gender norms influence women’s SRH outcomes, highlighting inter-study relationships and key themes [31].

Ethical considerations

As this systematic review relies on published data, ethical approval is not required. However, proper handling of data was ensured throughout the review process.

Results

Study characteristics

Geographic spread

The reviewed studies encompass 38 separate research projects spread across diverse geographical regions, including Asia (Iran, Pakistan, Siri Lanka, Indonesia), Africa (Mozambique, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Uganda, Morocco, Zimbabwe, Rwanda, Kenya, South Africa, Mali, Malawi, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Senegal), North America (USA, Canada), Oceania (Australia), and a study that include 23 European countries (Belgium, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, among others). The diversity in locations underscores the universal relevance of gender norms and their impact on women's health, reflecting varied cultural, economic, and societal contexts (Table 2).

Table 2 Summary of included studies by country, income level, and region
Full size table

Methodological approaches

Methodologies varied across the studies, incorporating both qualitative and quantitative approaches to provide a rich, multi-dimensional understanding of the dynamics at play. Qualitative methods (e.g., in-depth interviews, focus groups) were employed in highlighting personal experiences and societal norms. The remaining studies used quantitative methods (e.g., surveys, cross-sectional analyses), which contributed robust statistical data to support broader trends observed in the qualitative research. This methodological diversity ensures a comprehensive analysis of the interplay between gender norms and health outcomes. [Table 1].

Study populations and objectives

Participants in these studies included adolescent girls, married women, sexual minorities (gender expansive women), and community members. Such variety allows the findings to be applicable to a broad spectrum of the female population and provides insights into the specific impacts of gender norms across different subgroups.

The primary objectives of these studies focused on a range of issues from exploring barriers to healthcare access to assessing the effects of community decision power on health behaviors. Common outcomes of interest included access to healthcare services, usage of contraception, and maternal health metrics. [Table 1].

Data synthesis

The results from analysis reveals several key themes and patterns related to sexual and reproductive health (SRH), gender dynamics, and healthcare access across various cultural contexts. The synthesis were centered on:

  • ➢ Lack of Comprehensive Sexual Education and Reproductive Health Information:

  • ✓ There is a widespread lack of comprehensive sexual education across regions. This educational gap leads to misinformation and negative health outcomes, such as unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections [21, 32].

  • ✓ In Iran, cultural norms and taboos significantly hinder discussions on sexual health, critically limiting adolescent access to necessary information and services, as it is stated in Janighorban et al. study “Our parents think their children are going astray. They’re not taught or guided about sexuality. This causes them to be unaware of the dangers” (participant No.37) [41].

  • ➢ Social Stigma and Barriers to Accessing SRH Services

    • ✓ Women face significant social stigma and barriers when accessing sexual and reproductive health services. Societal attitudes, cultural norms, and healthcare provider biases contribute to the marginalization of certain populations, hindering their ability to seek and receive necessary care [33, 50]. In context like Morocco, study participants reported a social stigma especially for unmarried girl in accessing SRH services [27].

    • ✓ In Iran and Mozambique, societal attitudes towards adolescent sexuality and reproductive health contribute to stigma and discrimination, particularly for unmarried individuals seeking contraceptive services or abortion care. This stigma may deter adolescents from seeking care or accessing accurate information about their sexual and reproductive health [21, 22].

    • ➢ Influence of Cultural Norms on Family Planning:

    • ✓ Cultural norms and values play a significant role in shaping family planning decisions. In communities where larger family sizes are desired, contraceptive usage may be lower due to cultural preferences for larger families and societal expectations surrounding fertility [53].

    • ✓ The influence of male and familial control over women's contraceptive choices, as observed in Mozambique and Ethiopia, underscores the importance of addressing gender dynamics and promoting women's autonomy in reproductive decision-making [22, 28].

    • ✓ Interventions aimed at promoting family planning should take into account cultural beliefs and norms surrounding fertility, contraception, and reproductive decision-making, while also addressing barriers to accessing contraceptive services and information [40].

    • ➢ Impact of Gender Dynamics on Maternal Healthcare:

    • ✓ Gender dynamics, including power imbalances and social norms, significantly affect maternal healthcare access and utilization [24, 36].

    • ✓ In Eastern Uganda, these dynamics manifest through limited decision-making autonomy and restricted mobility for women, negatively influencing their healthcare access [24].

    • ➢ Women's autonomy and reproductive decision-making:

    • ✓ Autonomy is a key factor in improving reproductive health decisions. Studies show that educated and economically independent women are more likely to make informed reproductive choices. As demonstrated in Rizkianti et al. where women with more autonomy experienced 1.7 (95% confidence interval: 1.17–2.45) times higher odds of using adequate antenatal care services [26, 38, 47, 61].

    • ✓ Enhancing women's agency involves addressing educational and economic barriers, as well as challenging gender norms that limit autonomy [26, 28, 37].

    • ➢ Cultural and Religious Influences on Health Perceptions:

    • ✓ Cultural and religious beliefs significantly shape attitudes and behaviors toward reproductive health, often leading to stigma and misinformation. Kingori et al. highlight how these norms critically influence community attitudes, substantially impacting access to sexual health knowledge through the mechanisms of stigma and fear of judgment [32, 34, 35, 49]

    • ➢ Need for Culturally Competent Healthcare Services:

    • ✓ The importance of culturally competent healthcare services cannot be overstated. Such services respect and recognize diverse cultural backgrounds and beliefs, facilitating better health outcomes. Healthcare providers must be trained to understand and address cultural, social, and religious factors that influence health behaviors and outcomes [49].

    • ✓ Culturally competent care includes fostering open, nonjudgmental communication, addressing stigma and discrimination effectively, and tailoring healthcare services to meet the unique needs of diverse populations. Additionally, community-centered mental health resources are crucial for mitigating the psychosocial impacts of cultural stigma and discrimination [42, 57].

Quality assessment of included studies

The average quality assessment score across all studies was approximately 98.42%, indicating a generally high standard of research quality.

Discussion

Our systematic review highlights the complex interplay between gender norms and women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) across diverse cultural contexts. The findings reveal consistent patterns, including a widespread lack of comprehensive sexual education, persistent stigma—especially affecting adolescents and unmarried women—and limited autonomy in reproductive decision-making due to entrenched gender power imbalances. Cultural and religious beliefs strongly shape perceptions of family planning and maternal care, while provider bias and systemic barriers further hinder access to SRH services.

This pattern is underscored by studies such as those by Janighorban et al. (2022) in Iran and Boaventura Manuel Cau [22] in Mozambique, which reveals the pervasive influence of societal attitudes and educational gaps on women’s health [21, 22]. Our review extends these findings, emphasizing that such influences transcend cultural and geographical boundaries, as seen in the narratives from vulnerable adolescents in Iran, which reflect a global issue where restrictive gender norms significantly contribute to barriers in sexual education and early uninformed pregnancies [23, 55].

Women's agency and education, as discussed by Drioui C. (2021) in Morocco, are pivotal in reshaping fertility preferences and improving intra-couple communication [26]. This review correlates with broader research indicating that autonomy is directly linked to improved reproductive health outcomes, as similarly highlighted in studies across various settings, including those by Mardi A. (2018) and Rosemary Morgan (2017), who suggest that community-level women’s agency is crucial for enhancing maternal health care outcomes [23, 24]. Additionally, the concept of empowerment is central to understanding how gender norms influence women’s SRH outcomes. Empowerment, agency, education, and system transformation are deeply interconnected, with each factor reinforcing the others. For example, education can enhance women’s agency by providing them with the knowledge and skills to make informed decisions about their SRH, while system transformation can create an enabling environment that supports women’s empowerment and agency [62].

Additionally, the findings emphasize the need for culturally sensitive healthcare provision to address the stigmatization and barriers women face in accessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services, a critical issue highlighted by Ouahid H (2023). The dominance of men in fertility decisions, as noted by Rizvi N. (2014) in Pakistan, and similar gender dynamics discussed in studies by Kazaura M. (2015) in Tanzania and Farmer (2015) in Rwanda, underscore the multifaceted nature of interventions required to tackle these issues effectively [25, 27, 33, 39].

This review supports the urgent call for educational and community-based interventions that challenge entrenched social norms and support equitable reproductive healthcare, particularly in regions like Sub-Saharan Africa and Rwanda, as explored by Sia D. et al. [47] and other similar studies [47]. The collective evidence underlines that while some progress has been made, significant efforts remain necessary. Targeted interventions that consider both practical and sociocultural factors are essential for advancing women's health outcomes.

The critical discourse on how gender norms shape and often impede women’s access to SRH services informs our discussion on the potential for policy interventions, community education, and individual autonomy to transform the SRH landscape, making services more accessible and equitable across various cultural contexts [36]. However, the included studies largely focused on individual-level factors, with limited attention to systemic barriers and opportunities. Future research should explore how interventions targeting empowerment, agency, education, and system transformation can collectively improve women’s SRH outcomes, particularly in low-resource settings.

While our review focused on the influence of gender norms on women’s SRH outcomes, the underrepresentation of sexual and gender minorities (SGM) in the included studies limits our ability to draw conclusions about their experiences. SGM may face unique challenges and barriers to accessing SRH services, which could be exacerbated by restrictive gender norms. Future research should prioritize the inclusion of SGM to better understand these dynamics and develop targeted interventions.

Furthermore, considering the geographic diversity of the selected studies, our review reveals clear contextual differences in how gender norms influence sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes across regions. Findings from the 38 studies reveal a notable distinction between low-, middle-, and high-income countries. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)—such as Tanzania, Morocco, and Pakistan—gender norms are often deeply rooted in traditional and patriarchal structures, restricting women's autonomy in SRH decision-making. This contributes to limited access to contraception, higher rates of early marriage, and ongoing stigma surrounding abortion and maternal care. In upper-middle-income countries (UMICs), such as Iran and Indonesia, religious and cultural values further constrain discussions around sexuality, particularly for adolescent girls. In contrast, studies from high-income countries (HICs)—including the United States, Canada, and several European nations—highlight more subtle yet persistent barriers, such as provider bias, cultural stigma, and socioeconomic disparities, especially impacting migrant and minority populations.

These findings underscore the need to tailor health interventions to specific cultural, economic, and social contexts. Mainstreaming gender into health strategies requires a nuanced understanding of each region’s societal fabric and a commitment to context-specific policies and programs grounded in the lived realities of women worldwide.

Limitations

This systematic review has several limitations. It includes only English and French studies, which may introduce language bias. There is also a risk of publication bias, as studies with positive findings are more likely to be published. The exclusion of grey literature, such as reports and dissertations, may have limited additional insights. Access restrictions to paywalled full-text articles further constrained study selection. Lastly, the review protocol was not registered before commencement; however, we have ensured transparency by thoroughly documenting our methodology, including the search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and data extraction process.

Conclusion

Our systematic review highlights the profound impact of cultural contexts and gender norms on womens sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes. Key findings reveal a widespread lack of comprehensive sexual education, significant social stigma, and barriers to accessing SRH services, particularly for marginalized groups such as unmarried women and adolescents. Studies from Iran, Morocco, and Mozambique illustrate how cultural taboos and healthcare provider biases restrict access to essential SRH information and services, leading to misinformation and negative health outcomes. Additionally, gender dynamics and limited decision-making power significantly hinder maternal healthcare access, as seen in Eastern Uganda and Ethiopia.

The review also underscores the critical role of culturally competent healthcare services, as cultural and religious beliefs often shape health behaviors, contributing to stigma and misinformation. To address these challenges, we recommend targeted interventions such as early, culturally sensitive SRH education, stigma reduction programs, and healthcare provider training to ensure equitable and respectful care. Collaborative efforts involving governments, healthcare providers, and communities are essential to dismantle these barriers.

Future research should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of systemic interventions, such as policy changes and community-based programs, to further inform evidence-based strategies for improving womens SRH outcomes.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. United Way NCA [Internet]. [cited 2023 Aug 4]. Gender Roles & Gender Norms: Definition & Examples. Available from: https://unitedwaynca.org/blog/gender-norms/

  2. WHO, UNFPA. [Internet]. [cited 2015].TAKING A LIFE-COURSE APPROACH TO SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH. Available from: https://eeca.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/Entre-Nous-82.pdf

  3. ONU FEMME, Déclaration et Programme d’action de Beijing,BPA_F_Final_WEB.pdf [Internet]. [cited 2024 Sep 5]. Available from: https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/CSW/BPA_F_Final_WEB.pdf

  4. Szasz I. Gender inequality and reproductive health: a perspective for the program. Salud Reprod Soc Organo Inf Programa Salud Reprod Soc El Col Mex. 1993Dec;1(1):13–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. UNFPA,Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights: An Essential Element of Universal Health Coverage, 86_SRH UHC Guide 2019.pdf [Internet]. [cited 2021 Dec 22]. Available from: https://eeca.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/86_SRH%20UHC%20Guide%202019.pdf

  6. UNFPA - United Nations Population Fund [Internet]. [cited 2021 Feb 14]. Our challenge is to finish the Unfinished Business. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/swop-2019

  7. Defining sexual health [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jun 23]. Available from: https://www.who.int/teams/sexual-and-reproductive-health-and-research/key-areas-of-work/sexual-health/defining-sexual-health

  8. Zuo X, Lou C, Gao E, Lian Q, Shah IH. Gender role attitudes, awareness and experiences of non-consensual sex among university students in Shanghai, China. Reprod Health [Internet]. 2018;15(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85043770888&doi=10.1186%2fs12978-018-0491-x&partnerID=40&md5=7724bf18231fdbc602525a638a62305e

  9. Tamang L, Raynes-Greenow C, McGeechan K, Black KI. Knowledge, experience, and utilisation of sexual and reproductive health services amongst Nepalese youth living in the Kathmandu Valley. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2017;11:25–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ortayli N, Baker D, Sedgh G, Chalasani S, Chirinda W, Greaney J, et al. CONSEILLÈRE PRINCIPALE À LA RECHERCHE : 2022;

  11. Sekpon DGVD, Both J, Ouedraogo R, Lange IL. « Éloigne cette honte de moi! »: une étude qualitative des normes sociales entourant les expériences d’avortement chez les adolescentes et jeunes femmes au Bénin. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 31(5):2294793.

  12. World Bank [Internet]. [cited 2024 Sep 5]. En ne scolarisant pas les filles, les pays se privent de dizaines de milliers de milliards de dollars, selon la Banque mondiale. Available from: https://www.banquemondiale.org/fr/news/press-release/2018/07/11/not-educating-girls-costs-countries-trillions-of-dollars-says-new-world-bank-report

  13. Près de la moitié des femmes de la planète sont privées du droit à disposer de leur corps, d’après le nouveau rapport de l’UNFPA, “Mon corps m’appartient” [Internet]. [cited 2024 Sep 5]. Available from: https://www.unfpa.org/fr/press/pres-de-la-moitie-des-femmes-de-la-planete-sont-privees-du-droit-disposer-de-leur-corps

  14. UNFPA. Gender Inequality Inhibits Women’s Sexual, Reproductive Rights, UNFPA Report Says [Internet]. KFF. 2019 [cited 2021 Jan 31]. Available from: https://www.kff.org/news-summary/gender-inequality-inhibits-womens-sexual-reproductive-rights-unfpa-report-says/

  15. Yaya S, Okonofua F, Ntoimo L, Udenige O, Bishwajit G. Gender inequity as a barrier to women’s access to skilled pregnancy care in rural Nigeria: a qualitative study. Int Health. 2019Nov 13;11(6):551–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Crockett C, Cooper B. Gender norms as health harms: reclaiming a life course perspective on sexual and reproductive health and rights. Reprod Health Matters. 2016Nov;24(48):6–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fleming PJ, Agnew-Brune C. Current Trends in the study of Gender Norms and Health Behaviors. Curr Opin Psychol. 2015Oct;1(5):72–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Morgan R, George A, Ssali S, Hawkins K, Molyneux S, Theobald S. How to do (or not to do)… gender analysis in health systems research. Health Policy Plan. 2016Oct;31(8):1069–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, et al., editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Internet]. 1st ed. Wiley; 2019 [cited 2025 Apr 23]. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1002/9781119536604

  20. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2021Mar 29;18(3): e1003583.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Janighorban M, Boroumandfar Z, Pourkazemi R, Mostafavi F. Barriers to vulnerable adolescent girls’ access to sexual and reproductive health. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2022;22(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85142805134&doi=10.1186%2fs12889-022-14687-4&partnerID=40&md5=6648d6c97132efa783e6c3eedca32d6b

  22. Cau BM. Community influences on contraceptive use in Mozambique. Health Place. 2015;31:10–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mardi A, Ebadi A, Shahbazi S, Esmaelzade Saeieh S, Behboodi Moghadam Z. Factors influencing the use of contraceptives through the lens of teenage women: A qualitative study in Iran. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2018;18(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85041334088&doi=10.1186%2fs12889-018-5116-3&partnerID=40&md5=96af326965c9a8a844e7c6752299cb7a

  24. Morgan R, Tetui M, Muhumuza Kananura R, Ekirapa-Kiracho E, George AS. Gender dynamics affecting maternal health and health care access and use in Uganda. Health Policy Plan. 2017;32(suppl_5):v13-21.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Kazaura M, Ezekiel M, Chitama D, Mlang’A E. Gender equitable men’s attitudes and beliefs to reduce hiv risk and gender-based violence in tanzania. Tanzan J Health Res [Internet]. 2015;17(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84921312118&doi=10.4314%2fthrb.v17i1.8&partnerID=40&md5=c307ebf3b9a556784ead25cf61eab707

  26. Drioui C, Bakass F. Gender Inequalities and Fertility in Morocco: Measuring Women’s Empowerment and Impact on the Ideal Number of Children. J Popul Soc Stud. 2021;29:325–50.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ouahid H, Mansouri A, Sebbani M, Nouari N, Khachay FE, Cherkaoui M, et al. Gender norms and access to sexual and reproductive health services among women in the Marrakech-Safi region of Morocco: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023;23(1):407.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Delbiso TD. Gender power relations in reproductive decision-making: The case of Gamo migrants in Addis Ababa. Ethiopia Etude Popul Afr. 2013;27(2):118–26.

    Google Scholar 

  29. MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018–08–01_ENG.pdf [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 27]. Available from: http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-01_ENG.pdf

  30. Reporting_the_results_of_the_MMAT.pdf [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 27]. Available from: http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/140056890/Reporting_the_results_of_the_MMAT.pdf

  31. Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews.

  32. Metusela C, Ussher J, Perz J, Hawkey A, Morrow M, Narchal R, et al. “In My Culture, We Don’t Know Anything About That”: Sexual and Reproductive Health of Migrant and Refugee Women. Int J Behav Med. 2017Dec;24(6):836–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rizvi N, S Khan K, Shaikh BT. Gender: Shaping personality, lives and health of women in Pakistan. BMC Womens Health [Internet]. 2014;14(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84897948327&doi=10.1186%2f1472-6874-14-53&partnerID=40&md5=621c4f35a7702cbf5a5f183a4d0eab5d

  34. Cerezo A, Ching S, Ramirez A. Healthcare Access and Health-Related Cultural Norms in a Community Sample of Black and Latinx Sexual Minority Gender Expansive Women. J Homosex. 2023;70(5):782–805.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kingori C, Ice GH, Hassan Q, Elmi A, Perko E. ‘If I went to my mom with that information, I’m dead’: sexual health knowledge barriers among immigrant and refugee Somali young adults in Ohio. Ethn Health. 2018;23(3):339–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Chiweshe M, Macleod C. ‘If You Choose to Abort, You Have Acted As an Instrument of Satan’: Zimbabwean Health Service Providers’ Negative Constructions of Women Presenting for Post Abortion Care. Int J Behav Med. 2017;24(6):856–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Belay AD, Mengesha ZB, Woldegebriel MK, Gelaw YA. Married women’s decision making power on family planning use and associated factors in Mizan-Aman, South Ethiopia: A cross sectional study. BMC Womens Health [Internet]. 2016;16(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85007418148&doi=10.1186%2fs12905-016-0290-x&partnerID=40&md5=c7a9da72e1358ca10503955dd13aceca

  38. Miani C. Medical abortion ratios and gender equality in Europe: an ecological correlation study. Sex Reprod Health Matters [Internet]. 2021;29(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85118776027&doi=10.1080%2f26410397.2021.1985814&partnerID=40&md5=6dc905a016a2640f45980d2cc8568316

  39. Farmer DB, Berman L, Ryan G, Habumugisha L, Basinga P, Nutt C, et al. Motivations and Constraints to Family Planning: A Qualitative Study in Rwanda’s Southern Kayonza District. Glob Health Sci Pract. 2015May 13;3(2):242–54.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Msoka AC, Pallangyo ES, Brownie S, Holroyd E. My husband will love me more if I give birth to more children: Rural women’s perceptions and beliefs on family planning services utilization in a low resource setting. Int J Afr Nurs Sci. 2019;10:152–8.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Amini E, McCormack M. Older Iranian Muslim women’s experiences of sex and sexuality: A biographical approach. Br J Sociol. 2021;72(2):300–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Kwambai TK, Dellicour S, Desai M, Ameh CA, Person B, Achieng F, et al. Perspectives of men on antenatal and delivery care service utilisation in rural western Kenya: A qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth [Internet]. 2013;13. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84879090272&doi=10.1186%2f1471-2393-13-134&partnerID=40&md5=fb4e87e540d42e277994b51086e38fe8

  43. Noge S, Botma Y, Steinberg H. Social norms as possible causes of stillbirths. Midwifery. 2020:90102823. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.midw.2020.102823.

  44. Bukuluki P, Kisaakye P, Houinato M, Ndieli A, Letiyo E, Bazira D. Social norms attitudes and access to modern contraception for adolescent girls in six districts in Uganda Abstract. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12913-021-07060-5.

  45. Achen S, Rwabukwali CB, Atekyereza P. Socio-cultural perceptions of sexuality influencing the sexual and reproductive health of pastoral adolescent girls in Karamoja sub-region in Uganda. Soc Sci Humanit Open. 2021;4(1):100191. ISSN 2590-2911. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.ssaho.2021.100191. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590291121000875.

  46. Mbarushimana V, Goldstein S, Conco DN. Not just the consequences but also the pleasurable sex: a review of the content of comprehensive sexuality education for early adolescents in Rwanda Abstract. BMC Public Health. 2023;23(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12889-022-14966-0.

  47. Sia D, Nguemeleu Tchouaket É, Hajizadeh M, Karemere H, Onadja Y, Nandi A. The effect of gender inequality on HIV incidence in Sub-Saharan Africa. Public Health. 2020;182:56–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. White D, Dynes M, Rubardt M, Sissoko K, Stephenson R. The Influence of Intrafamilial Power on Maternal Health Care in Mali: Perspectives of Women Men And Mothers-in-Law. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2013;39(02):058–68. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1363/3905813.

  49. Chandrasekaran S, Key K, Ow A, Lindsey A, Chin J, Goode B, et al. The role of community and culture in abortion perceptions, decisions, and experiences among Asian Americans. Front Public Health [Internet]. 2023;10. Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85147180860&doi=10.3389%2ffpubh.2022.982215&partnerID=40&md5=73f7c5f15defa8d1e6f47f9d97ba062b

  50. Tesha J, Fabian A, Mkuwa S, Misungwi G, Ngalesoni F. The role of gender inequities in women’s access to reproductive health services: a population-level study of Simiyu Region Tanzania. BMC Public Health [Internet]. 2023;23(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85163107057&doi=10.1186%2fs12889-023-15839-w&partnerID=40&md5=34d740def2fa820f709866b0d29cc43b

  51. Garrison-Desany HM, Wilson E, Munos M, et al. The role of gender power relations on women’s health outcomes: evidence from a maternal health coverage survey in Simiyu region, Tanzania. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:909. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12889-021-10972-w.

  52. Zinke-Allmang A, Bhatia A, Gorur K, Hassan R, Shipow A, Ogolla C, Keizer K, Cislaghi B. The role of partners parents and friends in shaping young women’s reproductive choices in Peri-urban Nairobi: a qualitative study. Abstract Reprod Health. 2023;20(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12978-023-01581-4.

  53. Rodrigues P, Manlosa AO, Fischer J, Schultner J, Hanspach J, Senbeta F, et al. The role of perceptions and social norms in shaping women’s fertility preferences: a case study from Ethiopia. Sustain Sci. 2022;17(6):2473–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Yamin AE, Bazile J, Knight L, Molla M, Maistrellis E, Leaning J (2015) Tracing shadows: How gendered power relations shape the impacts of maternal death on living children in sub Saharan Africa. Social Science & Medicine. 135:143–50. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.04.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bazié F, Thomas HL, Byrne ME, Kindo B, Bell SO, Moreau C. Typologies of women’s abortion trajectories in Burkina Faso: findings from a qualitative study. Reprod Health [Internet]. 2022;19(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85142813214&doi=10.1186%2fs12978-022-01526-3&partnerID=40&md5=e6cb305a1a08328418c1e9bed0f271aa

  56. Jordal M, Wijewardena K, Olsson P. Unmarried women’s ways of facing single motherhood in Sri Lanka – a qualitative interview study. BMC Women's Health. 2013;13(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/1472-6874-13-5.

  57. Thatte N, Bingenheimer JB, Ndiaye K, Rimal RN. Unpacking the barriers to reproductive health services in Ghana: HIV/STI testing, abortion and contraception. Afr J Reprod Health. 2016;20(2):53–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Tiruneh FN, Chuang K-Y, Chuang Y-C. Women’s autonomy and maternal healthcare service utilization in Ethiopia BMC Health Services Research. 2017;17(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12913-017-2670-9.

  59. Sougou NM, Bassoum O, Faye A, Leye MMM. Women’s autonomy in health decision-making and its effect on access to family planning services in Senegal in 2017: a propensity score analysis Abstract BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12889-020-09003-x.

  60. Rizkianti A, Afifah T, Saptarini I, Rakhmadi MF. Women's decision-making autonomy in the household and the use of maternal health services: An Indonesian case study. Midwifery. 2020;90:102816. https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1016/j.midw.2020.102816. Epub 2020 Aug 12. PMID: 32823256.

  61. Tesfa D, Azanaw MM, Gebremariam AD, Engidaw MT, Tiruneh M, Zemene MA, et al. Women’s independent decision-making power and determinants on not to use contraceptives among currently married women in Ethiopia using demographic and Health Survey data: Multilevel Analysis. BMC Womens Health [Internet]. 2022;22(1). Available from: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85144520099&doi=10.1186%2fs12905-022-02051-y&partnerID=40&md5=391cc7e61523b5cbb0067d0bc137e90a

  62. Lwamba E, Shisler S, Ridlehoover W, Kupfer M, Tshabalala N, Nduku P, et al. Strengthening women’s empowerment and gender equality in fragile contexts towards peaceful and inclusive societies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Campbell Syst Rev. 2022Mar 8;18(1): e1214.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This review was not funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bioscience, and Health Research Laboratory, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakech, Morocco

    Hajar Ouahid, Majda Sebbani, Mohamed Amine & Latifa Adarmouch

  2. Department of Public Health, Community Medicine and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakech, Morocco

    Majda Sebbani, Mohamed Amine & Latifa Adarmouch

  3. Clinical Research Department, Mohammed VI University Hospital, Marrakech, Morocco

    Majda Sebbani, Mohamed Amine & Latifa Adarmouch

  4. Laboratory of Pharmacology, Neurobiology, Anthropobiology, and Environment, Semlalia Faculty of Sciences, Cadi Ayyad University, Marrakech, Morocco

    Mohamed Cherkaoui

Authors
  1. Hajar Ouahid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Majda Sebbani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohamed Cherkaoui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohamed Amine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  5. Latifa Adarmouch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

H.O conceptualized and designed the review topic, developed the search strategy, collected data, performed the analysis, and wrote the original draft of the manuscript. L.A conception, methodology, analysis, review and editing the manuscript. M.S, M.C and M.A review of the manuscript, supervision.

All the authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hajar Ouahid.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

As this systematic review relies on published data, ethical approval is not required.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ouahid, H., Sebbani, M., Cherkaoui, M. et al. The influence of gender norms on women’s sexual and reproductive health outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Women's Health 25, 224 (2025). https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12905-025-03768-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s12905-025-03768-2

Keywords

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

Contact us