ArticlePerspectives on sexual and reproductive health2024
Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion-restrictive states.
Article in Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 2024. 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.
- Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion-restrictive states.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn the era of Dobbs, legality of abortion care in the United States depends upon state law. Even before Dobbs, while abortion remained legal mounting restrictions and debate surrounding legal abortion could have led to confusion about abortion legality and discouraged patients from accessing legal abortion. We hypothesized an association between believing abortion is illegal or uncertainty about legality with later timing of abortion care.
methodsWe surveyed patients seeking abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky from April 2020 to April 2021. We asked about their understanding of abortion legality at the time they were first deciding to have an abortion. Using unconditional logistic regression models, we examined associations between beliefs about abortion legality (measured as belief that abortion is legal or sometimes legal versus. illegal or unsure) and timing of abortion care (measured as trimester of abortion).
resultsOver half (57%) of the 1,479 patients who met eligibility criteria and completed the survey believed abortion was always legal, 21% thought abortion was sometimes legal, 12% believed abortion was illegal, and 10% did not know. Most (92%) had a first trimester abortion (<14 weeks gestation). Belief that abortion was illegal, or uncertainty about abortion legality, was not significantly associated with second trimester abortion care (unadjusted odds ratio [uOR]: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-1.20). This association did not change meaningfully after adjusting for demographic and clinical variables (adjusted OR [aOR]: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51-1.33). DISCUSSION: More than one in five patients presenting for abortion care in three abortion-restrictive states prior to Dobbs erroneously believed that abortion was illegal or were unsure. Understanding of legality was not significantly associated with timing of abortion care. These misunderstandings could escalate under Dobbs.
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.