ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2022
The End of
Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Supreme Court seems poised to overrule Roe v. Wade and hold that there is no constitutional right to choose abortion. The reversal of Roe seems to run counter to public opinion in the United States-while many favor restrictions, a clear majority do not want Roe reversed and favor access to abortion early in pregnancy. The current Court's apparent willingness to run the risk of political pushback has a complex history. Scholars have long described the Court as a countermajoritarian institution, but in practice, as historians have shown, the Court tends not to stray too far from popular opinion. For a Court bent on reversing Roe and tackling a long list of other divisive topic, concerns about institutional legitimacy no longer appear to be an effective check. A post-Roe Court may be more unplugged from popular opinion, with unpredictable results for the future of the democracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35593911What 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.