ArticleFamily medicine2023
Abortion Provision Among Family Physicians Underrepresented in Medicine.
Article in Family medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesWorkforce diversity in primary care is critical for improved health outcomes and mitigation of inequities. However, little is known about the racial and ethnic identities, training histories, and practice patterns of family physicians who provide abortions.
methodsFamily physicians who graduated from residency programs with routine abortion training from 2015 through 2018 completed an anonymous electronic cross-sectional survey. We measured abortion training, intentions to provide abortion, and practice patterns, and examined differences between underrepresented in medicine (URM) and non-URM physicians using χ2 tests and binary logistic regression.
resultsTwo hundred ninety-eight respondents completed the survey (39% response rate), 17% of whom were URM. Similar percentages of URM and non-URM respondents had abortion training and had intended to provide abortions. However, fewer URMs reported providing procedural abortion in their postresidency practice (6% vs 19%, P=.03) and providing abortion in the past year (6% vs 20%, P=.023). In adjusted analyses, URMs were less likely to have provided abortions after residency (OR=.383, P=.03) and in the past year (OR=.217, P=.02) compared to non-URMs. Of the 16 noted barriers to provision, few differences were evident between groups on the indicators measured.
conclusionsDifferences in postresidency abortion provision existed between URM and non-URM family physicians despite similar training and intentions to provide. Examined barriers do not explain these differences. Further research on the unique experiences of URM physicians in abortion care is needed to then consider which strategies for building a more diverse workforce should be employed.
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.