Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40860790›Full record

ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2024

A matter of choice: a cross-sectional study examining the impact of the overturning of

Alissa Conklin, Zeb Saeed, Sacha Sharp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2024. 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

3 authors.

Alissa ConklinDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4418-3595
Zeb SaeedDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8195-5890
Sacha SharpDepartment of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1532-4783

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In June 2022, the Methods: Between December 2022 and March 2023, an anonymous survey was carried out at Indiana University School of Medicine, which included questions about personal beliefs on abortion and the current abortion laws in Indiana, as well as priorities when choosing residency training and practice locations. Results: Our survey found that four-fifths of medical students in Indiana disagreed with the Conclusion: Our research suggests that physicians who are more liberal in their views on abortion may now be much less likely to practice in conservative states which will compound the healthcare outcomes secondary to the Dobbs decision. We emphasize the role that abortion laws have in shaping the landscape of healthcare workforce and the need for a more nuanced understanding of how societal structures impact women's reproductive decisions and career paths in medicine.

Indexed as

abortioncareer choiceseducation

Identifiers

PMID40860790
PMCPMC12375184

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.