ArticleContraception2023
Comparing preference for and use of medication abortion in Texas after policy changes in 2014 and 2018.
Article in Contraception, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived quality of care of medical abortions in the public health system in Catalonia (Spain).BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Abortion patients' decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas' 2021 abortion ban.Health services research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAssess preferences for and use of medication abortion in Texas after implementation of two policy changes: a 2013 state law restricting medication abortion and the FDA label change for mifepristone in 2016 nullifying some of this restriction. STUDY
designWe analyzed surveys conducted in 2014 and 2018 with abortion patients at 10 Texas abortion facilities. We calculated the percentage of all respondents with an initial preference for medication abortion by survey year, and the type of abortion obtained or planned to obtain among those who were at <10 weeks of gestation. We used multivariable-adjusted mixed-effects Poisson regression models to assess factors associated with medication abortion preference and actual/planned use.
resultsOverall, 156 (41%) of 376 respondents in 2014 and 247 (55%) of 448 respondents in 2018 reported initial preference for medication abortion (Prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.28; 95% CI 1.03-1.59). Among those who were <10 weeks of gestation and initially preferred medication abortion, 39 of 124 (31%) obtained or were planning to obtain the method in 2014, compared with 188 of 223 (84%) in 2018 (PR: 2.65; 95% CI: 1.69-4.15). After multivariable adjustment, respondents who initially preferred medication abortion and were 7 to 9 weeks of gestation at the time of their ultrasonography (vs <7 weeks) were less likely to obtain or plan to obtain the method (PR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.57-0.84).
conclusionsAbortion patients were more likely to prefer and obtain or plan to obtain their preferred medication abortion after legal restrictions in Texas were nullified. IMPLICATIONS: State policies can affect people's ability to obtain their preferred abortion method. Efforts to provide both abortion options whenever possible, and inform people where each can be obtained, remains an important component of person-centered care despite increasing state abortion restrictions and bans following the reversal of Roe v Wade.
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.