Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33894250›Full record

ArticleContraception2021

Perspectives of internal medicine physicians regarding medication abortion provision in the primary care setting.

Tierney Wolgemuth, Colleen Judge-Golden, Katherine Lane, Jamie Stern, Sonya Borrero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Tierney WolgemuthUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chicago, IL, United States. Electronic address: tierney.wolgemuth@northwestern.edu.
Colleen Judge-GoldenUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Center for Women's Health Research and Innovation (CWHRI), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,, United States. Electronic address: cpj6@pitt.edu.
Katherine LaneUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. Electronic address: lanekc@upmc.edu.
Jamie SternUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States. Electronic address: sternjl@upmc.edu.
Sonya BorreroUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States; Center for Women's Health Research and Innovation (CWHRI), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA,, United States. Electronic address: borrsp@upmc.edu.

Funding

NRSA Training CoreTL1TR001858 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI RADOMSKI, THOMAS, RUBIO, DORIS M · 2016 to 2025
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR001858
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo better understand medication abortion attitudes and interest in future provision among Internal Medicine primary care providers (IM PCPs), and to characterize barriers to provision. STUDY

designWe conducted a survey with IM attendings and trainees at a large academic medical center in Western Pennsylvania. We used descriptive statistics to characterize attitudes towards medication abortion provision, including the belief that it is within their scope of practice and interest in future provision, and to explore perceived barriers to provision. We used logistic regression models to assess factors associated with each of these attitudes.

resultsOf 397 eligible attendings and trainees, 121 (30%) completed the survey. Among those surveyed, 44% believed medication abortion is within the scope of practice of IM PCPs with trainees and female-identifying providers being significantly more likely to believe medication abortion is within their scope of practice compared to attending physicians and male physicians (60% vs 30%, p < 0.01 and 53% vs 31%, p = 0.01, respectively). Similarly, 43% endorsed interest in future provision, with trainees (67% vs 23%, p < 0.001) and female providers (54% vs 27%, p = 0.002) being more likely to express interest. The most cited barriers to provision included limited training in residency (70%) and low familiarity with abortion medications (57%).

conclusionsMany IM providers- particularly trainees- believe medication abortion is within their scope of practice and would like to provide this care. Interventions are needed to provide education and assistance complying with state and federal regulations to enable safe and efficient medication abortion provision by IM providers. IMPLICATIONS: IM departments and residency programs should seek to ensure training is offered to clinicians interested in providing medication abortion as a part of their primary care practice.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAttitude of Health PersonnelReproductive RightsFemaleHumansInternal MedicineMalePhysiciansPregnancyPrimary Health CareSurveys and QuestionnairesWomen's HealthCOVID-19Medication abortionReproductive justiceWomen's health

Identifiers

PMID33894250
PMCPMC8745765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.