Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36843836›Full record

ReviewOccupational health science2023

The Dobbs Decision and the Future of Occupational Health in the US.

Mindy E Bergman, Vanessa A Gaskins, Tammy Allen, Ho Kwan Cheung, Mikki Hebl, Eden B King, Robert R Sinclair, Rose L Siuta, Corrine Wolfe, Alexandra I Zelin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Occupational health science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Mindy E BergmanTexas A&M University, College Station, TX USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4529-4925
Vanessa A GaskinsCharlotte, USA.
Tammy AllenUniversity of South Florida, Tampa, FL USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0667-6138
Ho Kwan CheungUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8516-5466
Mikki HeblRice University, Houston, TX USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8319-7851
Eden B KingRice University, Houston, TX USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7069-5130
Robert R SinclairClemson University, Clemson, SC USA.
Rose L SiutaTexas A&M University, College Station, TX USA.
Corrine WolfeAtlanta, USA.
Alexandra I ZelinCharlotte, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3856-0241

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Access to abortion care has a profound impact on women's ability to participate in the workforce. In the US, restrictions on abortion care have waxed and waned over the years, including periods when abortion was broadly permitted across the nation for most pregnant people for a substantial proportion of pregnancy and times when restrictions varied across states, including states where abortion is banned for nearly all reasons. Additionally, access to abortion care has always been a reproductive justice issue, with some people more able to access this care than others even when it is structurally available. In June 2022, the US Supreme Court handed down the

Indexed as

Abortion careCaregiving responsibilitiesDobbs v. JacksonOccupational healthRoe v. Wade

Identifiers

PMID36843836
PMCPMC9940085

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.