Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30275609›Full record

ArticleThe Linacre quarterly2018

Treatment of an Ectopic Pregnancy: An Ethical Reanalysis.

Maureen L Condic, Donna Harrison

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Linacre quarterly, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Defining 'Abortion': a call for clarity.Theoretical medicine and bioethics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Maureen L CondicDepartment of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Utah, School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Donna HarrisonAmerican Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Eau Claire, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is considerable lack of clarity on the medical facts surrounding management of ectopic pregnancy. In particular, it is not widely appreciated that by the time an ectopic pregnancy is diagnosed, in most cases, there is no viable fetus (i.e., the fetus has already died). Moreover, there is very little ethical guidance from the medical profession regarding the emotionally difficult decision to terminate a wanted pregnancy when the life of the mother is at risk. The best articulated positions on this topic come from religious groups, based on the principle of double effect. Yet the application of this reasoning to termination of an ectopic pregnancy is inconsistent with the medical facts in many cases. To resolve these inconsistencies, while still providing a robust ethical context for resolving such difficult situations, we propose clear guidelines for determining when a viable fetus is present in ectopic pregnancy and clarify the moral object in ectopic pregnancy management.

Indexed as

AbortionDouble effectEctopic pregnancyParturitionPregnancySeparation of mother and fetus

Identifiers

PMID30275609
PMCPMC6161225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.