Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33930382›Full record

ArticleContraception2021

Federal, state, and institutional barriers to the expansion of medication and telemedicine abortion services in Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Kelsey Mello, Mikaela H Smith, B Jessie Hill, Payal Chakraborty, Katherine Rivlin, Danielle Bessett, Alison H Norris, Michelle L McGowan

Open access · bronzeAbstract 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Longitudinal Impact ofAmerican journal of public health · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Provider Mistrust and Telemedicine Abortion Care Preferences Among Patients in Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on induced abortions in France in 2020.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2022
    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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Kelsey MelloDepartment of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States.
Mikaela H SmithDivision of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
B Jessie HillSchool of Law, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, United States.
Payal ChakrabortyDivision of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Katherine RivlinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, United States.
Danielle BessettDepartment of Sociology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States.
Alison H NorrisDivision of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States.
Michelle L McGowanDepartment of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ethics Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States. Electronic address: michelle.mcgowan@cchmc.org.
The Ohio State University · USUniversity of Cincinnati · USCase Western Reserve University · USCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWe aimed to characterize the combined impact of federal, state, and institutional policies on barriers to expanding medication and telemedicine abortion care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic in the abortion-restrictive states of Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia. STUDY

designWe analyzed 4 state policies, 2 COVID-related state executive orders, and clinic-level survey data on medication abortion provision from fourteen abortion facilities in Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia from December 2019 to December 2020. We calculated the percent of medication abortions provided at these facilities during the study period by state, to assess changes in medication abortion use during the pandemic.

resultsWe ascertained that COVID-19-executive orders in Ohio and West Virginia that limited procedural abortion in Spring 2020 coincided with an increase in the overall number and proportion of medication abortions in this region, peaking at 1613 medication abortions (70%) in April 2020. Ohio and West Virginia, which had executive orders limiting procedural abortion, saw relatively greater increases in April compared to Kentucky. Despite temporary lifting of the mifepristone REMS, prepandemic regulations banning telemedicine abortion in Kentucky and West Virginia and requiring in-person clinic visits for medication abortion distribution in Ohio limited clinics' ability to adapt to offer medication abortion by mail.

conclusionsOur findings illustrate how restrictive medication and telemedicine abortion policies in Ohio, Kentucky, and West Virginia created additional obstacles for patients seeking medication abortion during the pandemic. Permanently lifting federal regulations on in-clinic distribution of mifepristone would only advantage abortion seekers in states without restrictive telehealth and medication abortion policies. State policies that limit access to comprehensive abortion services should be central in larger efforts toward dismantling barriers that impinge upon reproductive autonomy. IMPLICATION STATEMENT: We find that abolishing the REMS on mifepristone would not be enough to expand access to patients in abortion-restrictive states with telemedicine and medication abortion laws. While the REMS is a barrier, it represents one of several hindrances to the expansion of telemedicine abortion distribution across the United States.

Indexed as

COVID-19Postal ServiceAbortifacient AgentsAbortion, InducedDrug and Narcotic ControlElective Surgical ProceduresFederal GovernmentFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansKentuckyOhioPregnancyPublic PolicyRisk Evaluation and MitigationSARS-CoV-2Abortifacient AgentsAbortionCOVID-19MifepristoneREMSState policyTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33930382
PMCPMC9748601
OpenAlexW3158718385

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.