Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33289197›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on sexual and reproductive health2020

COVID-19 and Independent Abortion Providers: Findings from a Rapid-Response Survey.

Sarah C M Roberts, Rosalyn Schroeder, Carole Joffe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States, 2020.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2020.Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Surveillance summaries (Washington, D.C. : 2002) · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Abortion During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Racial Disparities and Barriers to Care in the USA.Sexuality research & social policy : journal of NSRC : SR & SP · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Sarah C M RobertsAdvancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco.
Rosalyn SchroederBixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco.
Carole JoffeDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextThe ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected abortion providers and abortion care, and the strategies clinics are adopting to navigate the pandemic, have not been well documented.

methodsIn April-May 2020, representatives from 103 independent abortion clinics (i.e., those not affiliated with Planned Parenthood) completed a survey that included close-ended questions about how the pandemic, the public health response, and designations of abortion as a nonessential service had affected their clinic, as well as open-ended questions about the pandemic's impact. Analyses were primarily descriptive but included an exploration of regional variation.

resultsAll U.S. regions were represented in the sample. At 51% of clinics, clinicians or staff had been unable to work because of the pandemic or public health responses. Temporary closures were more common among clinics in the South (35%) and Midwest (21%) than in the Northeast and West (5% each). More than half of clinics had canceled or postponed nonabortion services (e.g., general gynecologic care); cancelation or postponement of abortion services was less common (25-38%, depending on type) and again especially prevalent in the South and Midwest. Respondents reported the pandemic had had numerous effects on their clinics, including disrupting their workforce, clinic flow and work practices; increasing expenses; and reducing revenues. State laws (including designations of abortion as nonessential) had exacerbated these difficulties.

conclusionsAlthough independent abortion clinics have faced considerable challenges from the pandemic, most continued to provide abortion care. Despite this resiliency, additional support may be needed to ensure sustainability of these clinics.

Indexed as

COVID-19Abortion, InducedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansPractice Patterns, Physicians'PregnancySARS-CoV-2United States

Identifiers

PMID33289197
PMCPMC7753746

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.