ArticleJAMA network open2022
Association Between Distance to an Abortion Facility and Abortion or Pregnancy Outcome Among a Prospective Cohort of People Seeking Abortion Online.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Geographic Access to Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Facilities by State Abortion Policy.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- The impact of legislative changes on abortion care: A retrospective study of one hospital system in North Carolina.Sexual & reproductive healthcare : official journal of the Swedish Association of Midwives · 2026Article
- Restrictive abortion policy climate is associated with increased depression symptoms among women in the United States: Findings from a 25-year longitudinal study.SSM. Mental health · 2026Article
- Unintended pregnancy among women living with HIV in Cross River State, Nigeria: prevalence, associated factors, and implications for HIV prevention.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Travel From Native Lands to US Abortion Facilities Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Decision.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Contraceptive Barriers and Psychological Well-Being After Repeat Induced Abortion: A Systematic Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Abortion access barriers shared in "r/abortion" afterSexual and reproductive health matters · 2024Article
- "To Anyone Reading in the Future You Are Not Alone": How Patients Seeking Abortion in a Surge State Use Their Stories to Support Each Other.American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Abortion Return Rates and Wait Times Before and After Texas' Executive Order Banning Abortion During COVID-19.American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Making sense of the economics of abortion in the United States.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2024Article
- The Role of Telehealth in Promoting Equitable Abortion Access in the United States: Spatial Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- Medication abortion via digital health in the United States: a systematic scoping review.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Adverse birth outcomes of adolescent and young adult women diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Changes in the Frequency and Type of Barriers to Reproductive Health Care Between 2017 and 2021.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Lived experiences and drivers of induced abortion among women in central Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Barriers Push People into Seeking Abortion Care Later in Pregnancy.American journal of public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Many people face barriers to abortion care, including long distances to an abortion facility. Objectives: To investigate the association of distance to the nearest abortion facility with abortion or pregnancy outcome. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was conducted using data from the Google Ads Abortion Access study, a prospective cohort study of individuals considering abortion recruited between August 2017 and May 2018. Individuals from 50 states and Washington, District of Columbia, who were pregnant and considering abortion based on self-report were recruited online using a stratified sampling technique. Participants completed online baseline and 4-week follow-up surveys. Data were analyzed between May and August 2021. Exposures: Driving distance to an abortion facility calculated from participant zip code and grouped into 4 categories (<5 miles, 5-24 miles, 25-49 miles, and ≥50 miles). Main Outcomes and Measures: Abortion or pregnancy outcome reported at 4-week follow-up, categorized as had an abortion, still seeking an abortion, or planning to continue pregnancy. Other measures included reported experience of 8 distance-related barriers to abortion, such as having to gather money for travel expenses and having to keep the abortion a secret. Results: Among 1485 pregnant individuals considering abortion who completed the baseline survey and provided contact information, 1005 individuals completed follow-up (follow-up rate, 67.7%) and 856 participants were included in the analytic sample (443 individuals ages 25-34 years [51.8%]; 208 Black individuals [24.3%]; 101 Hispanic or Latinx individuals [11.8%], and 468 White individuals [54.8%]). Most participants had at least some college education (474 individuals [55.5%]). Distance to an abortion facility was less than 5 miles for 233 individuals (27.2%), 5 to 24 miles for 373 individuals (43.6%), 25 to 49 miles for 85 individuals (9.9%), and 50 or more miles for 165 individuals (19.3%) (mean [SD] distance = 28.3 [43.8] miles). Most participants reported at least 1 distance-related barrier (763 individuals [89.1%]), with a mean of 3.3 barriers (95% CI, 3.2-3.5 barriers) reported. For 7 of 8 distance-related barriers, an increased percentage of participants living farther from an abortion facility reported the barrier compared with participants living less than 5 miles from a facility; for example, 61.8% (95% CI, 53.5%-69.4%) of individuals living less than 5 miles reported having to gather money for travel expenses, while 81.2% (95% CI, 70.8%-88.5%; P = .002) of those living 25 to 49 miles and 75.8% (95% CI, 69.9%-81.0%; P = .02) of those living 50 or more miles from a facility reported this barrier. At follow-up, participants living 50 or more miles from a facility had higher odds of still being pregnant and seeking abortion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35-3.17; P = .001) or planning to continue pregnancy (aOR = 1.96; 95% CI, 1.06-3.63; P = .03) compared with participants living within 5 miles. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that greater distance from an abortion facility was associated with delays in obtaining abortion care and inability to receive abortion care. These findings suggest that innovative approaches to abortion provision may be needed to mitigate outcomes associated with long distances to abortion facilities.
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.