Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31481033›Full record

ArticleBMC women's health2019

Reducing underreporting of stigmatized pregnancy outcomes: results from a mixed-methods study of self-managed abortion in Texas using the list-experiment method.

Heidi Moseson, Sofia Filippa, Sarah E Baum, Caitlin Gerdts, Daniel Grossman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC women's health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Estimating Prevalence of Abortion Using List Experiments: Findings from a Survey of Women in Delaware and Maryland.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    Article
  18. 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

5 authors.

Heidi MosesonIbis Reproductive Health, 1736 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612, USA. hmoseson@ibisreproductivehealth.org.ORCID 0000-0002-2488-2429
Sofia FilippaIbis Reproductive Health, 1736 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612, USA.
Sarah E BaumIbis Reproductive Health, 1736 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612, USA.
Caitlin GerdtsIbis Reproductive Health, 1736 Franklin Street, Oakland, California, 94612, USA.
Daniel GrossmanAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Suite 1100, Oakland, California, 94612, USA.

Funding

Population Research CenterR24HD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN · PI HAYWARD, MARK D. · 2002 to 2016
$8.4M
Scientific & Technical CoreP2CHD042849 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Elizabeth T. Gershoff · 2017 to 2026
$5.2M
NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD042849NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD042849
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurately measuring stigmatized experiences is a challenge across reproductive health research. In this study, we tested a novel method - the list experiment - that aims to reduce underreporting of sensitive events by asking participants to report how many of a list of experiences they have had, not which ones. We applied the list experiment to measure "self-managed abortion" - any attempt by a person to end a pregnancy on one's own, outside of a clinical setting - a phenomenon that may be underreported in surveys due to a desire to avoid judgement.

methodsWe administered a double list experiment on self-managed abortion to a Texas-wide representative sample of 790 women of reproductive age in 2015. Participants were asked how many of a list of health experiences they had experienced; self-managed abortion was randomly added as an item to half of the lists. A difference in the average number of items reported by participants between lists with and without self-managed abortion provided a population level estimate of self-managed abortion. In 2017, we conducted cognitive interviews with women of reproductive age in four states to understand how women (1) interpreted the list experiment question format, and (2) interpreted the list item on prior experiences attempting to self-manage an abortion.

resultsResults from this list experiment estimated that 8% of women of reproductive age in Texas have ever self-managed an abortion. This number was higher than expected, thus, the researchers conducted cognitive interviews to better understand how people interpreted the list experiment on self-managed abortion. Some women interpreted "on your own" to mean "without the knowledge of friends or family", as opposed to "without medical assistance", as intended.

conclusionThe list experiment may have reduced under-reporting of self-managed abortion; however, the specific phrasing of the list item may also have unintentionally increased reporting of abortion experiences not considered "self-managed." High participation in and comprehension of the list experiment, however, suggests that this method is worthy of further exploration as tool for measuring stigmatized experiences.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAdultAttitude to HealthFemaleHumansMedical History TakingPregnancyQualitative ResearchReproductive HealthReproductive HistoryResearch DesignStereotypingTexasWomen's HealthAbortionList experimentMeasurement errorStigmaSurvey methodologyTexas

Identifiers

PMID31481033
PMCPMC6720920

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.