ArticleJAMA2018
Association of Facility Type With Procedural-Related Morbidities and Adverse Events Among Patients Undergoing Induced Abortions.
Article in JAMA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing uterine evacuation in a patient with Asherman syndrome who failed procedural and medication abortions: a case report.Case reports in women's health · 2026Article
- Global, regional, and national levels of maternal mortality, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Understanding the Ethiopian policy landscape on abortion services using a health policy triangle framework.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- Measuring abortion in claims data: What is the state of the science?Contraception · 2025Review
- The limitations of using Medicaid administrative data in abortion research.Contraception · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Heavy Metals and Missed Abortion: Using Mediation of Serum Hormones.Biological trace element research · 2024Article
- First trimester abortion protocols by facility type in Switzerland and potential barriers to accessing the service.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A more accurate approach to define abortion cohorts using linked administrative data: an application to Ontario, Canada.International journal of population data science · 2022Article
- Effects of Statins on the Incidence and Mortality of Sepsis in Patients with New Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Outcomes in 1096 patients with severe thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura before the Caplacizumab era.PloS one · 2021Article
- Evaluation of diagnosis and prognosis with anti-mullerian hormone level in early missed abortion.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Miscarriage Treatment-Related Morbidities and Adverse Events in Hospitals, Ambulatory Surgery Centers, and Office-Based Settings.Journal of patient safety · 2020Article
- Maternal and procedural factors associated with estimated blood loss in second trimester surgical uterine evacuation: a retrospective cohort analysis.International journal of obstetric anesthesia · 2020Article
- Article
- Physician procedure volume and related adverse events after surgically induced abortion: a population-based cohort study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2019Article
- Complication Rates and Downstream Medical Costs Associated With Invasive Diagnostic Procedures for Lung Abnormalities in the Community Setting.JAMA internal medicine · 2019Article
- Data Error.JAMA · 2018Article
- Intraoperative Blood Loss during Induced Abortion: A Comparison of Anesthetics.Anesthesiology research and practice · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issuedData Error.2018
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Multiple states have laws requiring abortion facilities to meet ambulatory surgery center (ASC) standards. There is limited evidence regarding abortion-related morbidities and adverse events following abortions performed at ASCs vs office-based settings. Objective: To compare abortion-related morbidities and adverse events at ASCs vs office-based settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of women with US private health insurance who underwent induced abortions in an ASC or office-based setting (January 1, 2011-December 31, 2014). Outcomes were abstracted from a large national private insurance claims database during the 6 weeks following the abortion (date of final follow-up, February 11, 2015). Exposures: Facility type for abortion (ASCs vs office-based settings, including facilities such as abortion clinics, nonspecialized clinics, and physician offices). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was any abortion-related morbidity or adverse event (such as retained products of conception, abortion-related infection, hemorrhage, and uterine perforation) within 6 weeks after an abortion. Two secondary outcomes, both subsets of the primary outcome, were major abortion-related morbidities and adverse events (such as hemorrhages treated with a transfusion, missed ectopic pregnancies treated with surgery, and abortion-related infections that resulted in an overnight hospital admission) and abortion-related infections. Results: Among 49 287 women (mean age, 28 years [SD, 7.3]) who had 50 311 induced abortions, (23 891 [47%] first-trimester aspiration, 13 480 [27%] first-trimester medication, and 12 940 [26%] second trimester or later), 5660 abortions (11%) were performed in ASCs and 44 651 (89%) in office-based settings. Overall, 3.33% had an abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; 0.32% had a major abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; and 0.74% had an abortion-related infection. In adjusted analyses, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs vs office-based settings, respectively, in the rates of abortion-related morbidities or adverse events (3.25% vs 3.33%, difference, -0.08%; [corrected] 95% CI, -0.58% to 0.43%; adjusted OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.81-1.17), major morbidities or adverse events (0.26% vs 0.33%; difference, -0.06%; 95% CI, -0.18% to 0.06%; adjusted OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.45-1.37), or infections (0.58% vs 0.77%; difference, -0.16%; 95% CI, -0.35% to 0.03%; adjusted OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with private health insurance who had an induced abortion, performance of the abortion in an ambulatory surgical center compared with an office-based setting was not associated with a significant difference in abortion-related morbidities and adverse events. These findings, in addition to individual patient and individual facility factors, may inform decisions about the type of facility in which induced abortions are performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.