Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33147223›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

The mesoeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic effects of abortion on health systems.

Samantha R Lattof, Ernestina Coast, Yana van der Meulen Rodgers, Brittany Moore, Cheri Poss

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Samantha R LattofDepartment of International Development, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0934-1488
Ernestina CoastDepartment of International Development, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, United Kingdom.
Yana van der Meulen RodgersDepartment of Labor Studies and Employment Relations, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7669-2857
Brittany MooreIpas, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5972-5183
Cheri PossIpas, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
London School of Economics and Political Science · GBRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the high incidence of abortion around the globe, we lack synthesis of the known economic consequences of abortion care and abortion policies at the mesoeconomic level (i.e. health systems and communities). This scoping review examines the mesoeconomic costs, benefits, impacts, and values of abortion care and policies. METHODS AND

findingsSearches were conducted in eight electronic databases. We conducted the searches and application of inclusion/exclusion criteria using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. For inclusion, studies must have examined at least one of the following outcomes: costs, benefits, impacts, and value of abortion care or abortion policies. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted for descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Of the 150 included mesoeconomic studies, costs to health systems are the most frequently reported mesoeconomic outcome (n = 116), followed by impacts (n = 40), benefits (n = 17), and values (n = 11). Within health facilities and health systems, the costs of providing abortion services vary greatly, particularly given the range with which researchers identify and cost services. Financial savings can be realized while maintaining or even improving quality of abortion services. Adapting to changing laws and policies is costly for health facilities. American policies on abortion economically impact health systems and facilities both domestically and abroad. Providing post-abortion care requires a disproportionate amount of health facility resources.

conclusionsThe evidence base has consolidated around abortion costs to health systems and health facilities in high-income countries more than in low- or middle-income countries. Little is known about the economic impacts of abortion on communities or the mesoeconomics of abortion in the Middle East and North Africa. Methodologically, review papers are the most frequent study type, indicating that researchers rely on evidence from a core set of costing papers. Studies generating new primary data on mesoeconomic outcomes are needed to strengthen the evidence base.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedCommunity Health PlanningFemaleHealth Care CostsHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID33147223
PMCPMC7641432
OpenAlexW3095990694

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.