ArticleContraception2025
Perspectives on options for self-sourcing medication abortion after implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8.
Article in Contraception, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge of Remote Medication Abortion Among Patients Traveling From States That Restrict Abortion.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Mexico-Based Accompaniment Collectives for Abortion in the US After Dobbs.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine experiences of pregnant Texans who considered self-sourcing medication abortion following the September 2021 implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8, which prohibited abortions after detectable embryonic cardiac activity. STUDY
designThis qualitative research study used in-depth telephone interviews conducted between October 2021 and August 2022 with pregnant and recently pregnant Texas residents ≥16 years of age who considered abortion. We recruited participants from two sources: flyers posted at abortion facilities in nearby states and an online survey of Texans seeking abortion care. We interviewed participants who obtained out-of-state abortion care or who reported self-managing their abortion, having a miscarriage or an ectopic pregnancy, or continuing their pregnancy. We used inductive and deductive coding in our thematic analysis examining perceptions of self-sourcing medication abortion and potential use of a hypothetical telehealth abortion model.
resultsOf the 120 participants interviewed, 50 researched or considered self-sourcing medication abortion, including 15 who ultimately sourced medications to self-manage their abortion. Participants described uncertainty about the safety and legality of their options for self-sourcing abortion medications, and most would have preferred to use telehealth abortion in a hypothetical legal policy context, including those who self-managed their abortion.
conclusionsIn the context of an abortion ban, people considered self-sourcing abortion medications, but had concerns about the legality and safety of doing so. People in states with restrictive abortion laws may benefit from information about how to access medication abortion from safe and reliable sources and mitigate their legal risks. IMPLICATIONS: People perceive meaningful differences between the legality and safety of telehealth and self-managed medication abortion. Strategies are needed to provide pregnant people in restricted settings with clear information so they can make an informed choice for their personal circumstances.
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.