ArticleSexuality research & social policy : journal of NSRC : SR & SP2025
Feelings about abortion at time of care: Findings from an Ohio abortion facility.
Article in Sexuality research & social policy : journal of NSRC : SR & SP, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Introduction: Prevailing abortion stigma may contribute to how people feel prior to receiving an abortion, and these feelings may influence healthcare decision making. We analyzed data from a patient intake questionnaire regarding feelings at the time of first abortion appointment. We described responses, co-occurrence of sentiments, and associations between responses and abortion characteristics. Methods: We abstracted data from a random 20% sample of medical charts at an abortion facility in Ohio for patients who sought abortions from 2014-2018 (N=762). We analyzed data from an intake questionnaire used to assess patients' sentiments prior to their abortion. The questionnaire had 10 intake items to which patients could respond "yes," "maybe," or "no." The questionnaire also asked, "How are you feeling today?" and listed several emotions for patients to select. Results: About 37% of patients responded with exclusively positive emotions, 27% with mixed emotions, and 27% with exclusively negative emotions. Reporting mixed (adjusted odds ratio [95%CI]: 0.33[0.16-0.71]) and negative only (0.38[0.18-0.32]) sentiments was associated with a decreased odds of receiving an abortion. Responding "yes" (vs. "no") to being afraid an abortion will hurt was associated with a decreased odds of having a procedural abortion vs. a medication abortion (0.62[0.40-0.96]). Responding "yes" to "I am not sure if I am making the right decision" was associated with a longer time between consultation and the abortion (adjusted incident rate ratio [95%CI]: 2.16[1.48-3.16]). Conclusions: Sentiment toward abortion is complicated and deserves nuanced attention, rather than being grouped into a strictly positive or negative experience. Policy Implications: Assessing patient sentiment prior to an abortion procedure may be valuable for providing patient-centered abortion care.
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.