ArticleContraception: X2024
"We just need to create as many avenues for access as we possibly can": Clinician and administrator attitudes toward telehealth medication abortion in the U.S. South.
Article in Contraception: X, 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: There is currently a gap in literature on the perspectives of sexual and reproductive health providers in the South toward telehealth abortion services. This research seeks to explore these perspectives to understand provider attitudes toward importance and priority of telehealth abortion to contribute to the development of a richer understanding of this in the South. Study design: This study conducts a secondary analysis of data from the Provider Readiness for Virtual Implementation and Delivery of Medication Abortion Services (PROVIDA) study. We collected qualitative data regarding perspectives of 20 providers toward importance and priority of telehealth abortion during a series of in-depth interviews that took place from June 2021-2022. Results: We identified four main themes: telehealth abortion is important for patient benefit in mitigating physical, administrative, financial, and privacy-related barriers; telehealth abortion is important for clinic benefit in improving clinic flow and sustainability; the political climate affects personal prioritization of telehealth abortion; and staff hesitance affects clinic prioritization of telehealth abortion. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed telehealth abortion to be particularly important in mitigating physical barriers for patients and for clinic sustainability. We found the political climate to be the most notable factor influencing personal prioritization of telehealth abortion, with most participants noting it made telehealth abortion less of a priority. Additionally, our analysis found participant perception of staff hesitation to implement telehealth abortion to be the most notable factor affecting clinic prioritization. Future research should utilize these findings to inform studies examining the implementation climate of telehealth abortion in the South. Implications: Highlighting insights from SRH professionals in restrictive environments, this study emphasizes the potential of telehealth abortion to mitigate the unique barriers to access and provision that abortion seekers and providers face in the U.S. South. This has important implications for motivating implementation in states where abortion is still legal but telehealth abortion is prohibited.
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.