Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40690214›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2025

Title X Policy Shifts and Michigan's Reproductive Health Safety Net.

Sarah D Compton, Andrea Pangori, Audrey Widner, Kamilah Davis-Wilson, Sarah Wallett, Vanessa K Dalton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sarah D ComptonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Andrea PangoriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Audrey WidnerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Kamilah Davis-WilsonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Sarah WallettPlanned Parenthood of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Vanessa K DaltonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

New Title X Regulations: Assessing the Impact on Reproductive HealthR21MD015847 · NIMHD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI COMPTON, SARAH D, DALTON, VANESSA K. · 2021 to 2022
$429k
NIMHD NIH HHS R21 MD015847
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The Title X Family Planning Program is a US federal grant program designed to offer comprehensive and confidential family planning and preventive health services to individuals in the US, regardless of their ability to pay. In 2019, a major change to the program-called the Final Rule-led to about 25% of participating clinics, including all Planned Parenthood affiliates, leaving the Title X program. Because Planned Parenthood of Michigan (PPMI) had served about 70% of Michigan's Title X clients, its withdrawal from Michigan's Title X program was anticipated to significantly alter the service coverage provided by the Title X program in the state. Objective: To examine the changes in geographic distribution, organizational profiles, and service delivery volumes of Title X health centers in Michigan-including those that left the program and then rejoined-before and after the implementation of the Final Rule. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included Title X-funded health centers in Michigan's 83 counties from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2023. Exposure: The enactment and reversal of the Title X Final Rule. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in service delivery volume, seen in (1) Title X penetration rate (number of unique females served at Title X-funded health centers), (2) PPMI penetration rate (number of unique females served by PPMI), and (3) reproductive health safety net penetration rate (sum of the females served by the Title X program and PPMI during the years it was excluded from Title X). Results: Title X service delivery counts decreased from 92 clinics before the implementation of the Final Rule in 2019 to 76 clinics during the Final Rule and increased to 92 after reversal of the Final Rule. Penetration rates were significantly higher before implementation of the Final Rule (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 3.98; 95% CI, 3.93-4.02) and after the Final Rule period (IRR, 2.96; 95% CI, 2.93-3.00). However, when PPMI service counts were included during the Final Rule period when PPMI was not formally part of Title X, there was considerably more stability in service delivery rates across the 3 periods (preperiod vs Final Rule period: IRR, 1.33; 95% CI 1.32-1.34; and postperiod vs Final Rule period: IRR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-1.00). The mean PPMI penetration rate was only 1.41 times higher in the preperiod than in the Final Rule period (IRR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.40-1.43). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study highlights PPMI's role in the state's Title X program and overall reproductive health safety net. During the relatively short time the Final Rule was in place, PPMI was able to maintain service delivery, protecting the public's health against these regulations. It is not clear if PPMI, or similar organizations, could maintain service delivery over a longer period.

Indexed as

Family Planning ServicesFinancing, GovernmentInternational Planned Parenthood FederationPreventive Health ServicesReproductive HealthReproductive Health ServicesSafety-net ProvidersCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMichigan

Identifiers

PMID40690214
PMCPMC12281240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.