ArticlePloS one2021
Quality of top webpages providing abortion pill information for Google searches in the USA: An evidence-based webpage quality assessment.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impacts of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Misinformation in Digital Spaces on Human Rights Protection and Promotion: Scoping Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2025Article
- "I'm Pregnant, What Do I Do?": Exploring How People Having Abortions in Britain Find and Use Online Sources of Information.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2025Article
- Evaluating ChatGPT's Utility in Biologic Therapy for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Comparative Study of ChatGPT and Google Web Search.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Online Misleading Information About Women's Reproductive Health: A Narrative Review.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Review
- Abortion access barriers shared in "r/abortion" afterSexual and reproductive health matters · 2024Article
- Automating untruths: ChatGPT, self-managed medication abortion, and the threat of misinformation in a post-Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- There's an App for it: A systematic review of mobile apps providing information about abortion using a revised MARS scale.PLOS digital health · 2023Article
- The Next Infodemic: Abortion Misinformation.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Fear of procedure and pain in individuals considering abortion: A qualitative study.Patient education and counseling · 2023Article
- Exploring Google Searches for Out-of-Clinic Medication Abortion in the United States During 2020: Infodemiology Approach Using Multiple Samples.JMIR infodemiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the United States, the internet is widely used to seek health information. Despite an estimated 18 million Google searches on abortion per year and the demonstrated importance of the abortion pill as an option for pregnancy termination, the top webpage search results for abortion pill searches, as well as the content and quality of those webpages, are not well understood.
methodsWe used Google's Custom Search Application Programming Interface (API) to identify the top 10 webpages presented for "abortion pill" searches on August 06, 2018. We developed a comprehensive, evidence-based Family Planning Webpage Quality Assessment Tool (FPWQAT), which was used to assess webpage quality for the five top webpages presenting text-based educational content.
resultsOf the top webpages for "abortion pill" searches, a plannedparenthood.com page was the top result and scored highest on our assessment (81%), providing high-quality and useable information. The other four webpages, a Wikipedia.com page and three anti-abortion information webpages, scored much lower on our assessment (14%-43%). These four webpages had lower quality of information in less useable formats. The anti-abortion pages also presented a variety of disinformation about the abortion pill.
conclusionsBoth the lack of accurate clinical content on the majority of top webpages and the concerning disinformation they contained raise concerns about the quality of online abortion pill information, while underlining challenges posed by Google search results to informed choice for consumers. Healthcare providers and consumers must be informed of online abortion pill content that is not based in current clinical evidence, while advocates and policymakers should push for online information that is credible and useable. These changes are imperative given the importance of sound abortion pill information for reproductive decision-making at a time when in-person abortion services are further challenged in the US.
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.