ReviewJournal of pregnancy2026
The Impact of Restrictive Abortion Laws on Medical Residency Applications and Healthcare Access: Implications for Maternal Health Equity.
Review in Journal of pregnancy, 2026. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The 2022 Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization returned regulatory authority over abortion to the states and precipitated a wave of restrictive state-level legislation. This narrative review examines how these state responses have influenced medical residency applications, physician training, and maternal health equity. Existing research indicates that restrictive state laws have contributed to a decline in residency applications to programs in jurisdictions with near-total abortion bans. A growing body of evidence suggests that many medical students, particularly those seeking OBGYN training, prioritize programs in states with fewer restrictions to ensure comprehensive clinical education. These trends may exacerbate existing maternity care deserts by contributing to physician shortages, particularly in underserved and rural areas. The review further explores how the post-Dobbs regulatory environment impacts physician training. Many OBGYN residency programs in restrictive states struggle to provide abortion training, often requiring residents to travel out of state, which creates significant financial and logistical burdens. Additionally, a lack of transparency regarding training availability in these states complicates the ability of prospective residents to assess program offerings. Beyond residency applications, these state-level restrictions have affected practicing physicians, contributing to burnout, legal uncertainties, and ethical dilemmas. Many providers in restrictive jurisdictions report moral distress and legal risks when making clinical decisions, leading some to relocate to states with greater reproductive freedoms. The compounded effects of these laws may widen healthcare disparities, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities, particularly low-income individuals and people of color. Given the limited longitudinal evidence since Dobbs, continued monitoring of OBGYN residency applications, training availability, workforce distribution, and maternal health outcomes is needed to determine the persistence and magnitude of these effects.
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.