ArticleFamily medicine2024
Abortion Training in Family Medicine Residency Programs: A National Survey of Program Directors 5 Months After the Dobbs Decision.
Article in Family medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating the complexities of out-of-state abortion training in the United States Post-AJOG global reports · 2026Article
- Who Provides? Clinician and Trainee Perspectives on Reproductive Healthcare Access in Vermont.Health services research · 2026Article
- Outcomes from a procedural abortion training program for providers in underserved areas: findings from a four-year evaluation.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Abortion Provision by Family Physicians Before and After Dobbs: Trends Across Career Stages and State Restrictions.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2026Article
- Decision-making for congenital anomalies diagnosed during pregnancy: a narrative review.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesRoutine abortion training during family medicine (FM) residency leads to higher rates of postresidency provision; increased availability of abortion care in the FM setting could greatly improve access. Especially in the post-Dobbs context, understanding the landscape of abortion training in US family medicine residency programs (FMRPs) is critical.
methodsWe invited all directors of US FMRPs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education to complete a larger omnibus online survey that included questions on abortion training. We compiled descriptive statistics and conducted χ2 tests and multivariate regression analyses to detect associations with abortion training.
resultsThe response rate was 42% (N=286). Nineteen percent of programs had routine medication abortion (MAB) training and 10% had routine aspiration training. In addition, 58% of programs offered elective MAB training and 52% offered elective aspiration training. In multivariate regression, the presence of abortion training was associated with a program having 31 or more residents, being in a state with protected abortion access, not having a Catholic affiliation, and having a program director who believed abortion training should be routine in FMRPs.
conclusionsWhile more than half of responding FMRPs reported some abortion training, much of it was elective, and 40% of programs lacked abortion training completely. Although abortion training is severely limited or prohibited in states with abortion bans, more training opportunities in the states where abortion is possible could increase access to abortion within primary care.
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.