ArticleBMJ public health2024
Perceptions and experiences with two no-test direct-to-patient telehealth medication abortion regimens in the USA: an exploratory study with mifepristone and misoprostol and misoprostol-only regimens.
Article in BMJ public 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.
- Acceptability of misoprostol-only medication abortion dispensed by mail-order or retail pharmacy: a qualitative study based on in-depth interviews in the United States.Sexual and reproductive health matters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Telehealth medication abortion (teleMAB) is an option for expanding abortion access in the USA. In this study, we compared the accessibility of two no-test, direct-to-patient teleMAB regimens: mifepristone and misoprostol, and misoprostol-only. Research design and methods: Over a 5-month period, we conducted an exploratory study surveying clients who received teleMAB services from an abortion clinic offering teleMAB. We calculated descriptive statistics focusing on the healthcare access dimensions of acceptability and accommodation. We conducted a content analysis of open-response comments focusing on convenience. Results: Of the 218 clients in the study: 195 (89%) selected the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen and 23 (11%) selected the misoprostol-only regimen. Across all respondents, 88% reported they would use the service again if they needed an abortion in the future. Half of the respondents (52%) connected to the service using a smartphone, 99% owned the device that they used, 98% could easily hear and 99% could easily talk to the prescribing provider, and only 7% had a problem connecting to the service. Respondents felt that teleMAB was convenient because they had quality and trustworthy communications. It also accommodated their childcare needs, travel, and scheduling, felt private and comfortable, and facilitated a sense of reproductive autonomy. Conclusions: Respondents found both teleMAB regimens to be acceptable, technologically accommodating and convenient. These results have promising implications for states positioned to expand insurance coverage and reimbursement for teleMAB, including misoprostol-only regimens. Results also inform a need to focus on policies that expand access to teleMAB through nationwide internet connectivity.
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.