Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42845752›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2026

Changes in tubal permanent contraception rates in South Carolina following the

Isabella Mateu, Erica Lowing, Jessica Britt, Erica F Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2026. 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

4 authors.

Isabella MateuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prisma Health Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Greenville, SC, United States.
Erica LowingDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prisma Health Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Greenville, SC, United States.
Jessica BrittDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prisma Health Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Greenville, SC, United States.
Erica F RobinsonDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Prisma Health Upstate, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Greenville, SC, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Supreme Court finalized its decision in Objective: We aim to assess the potential impact of the Study design: This observational, retrospective cohort study included 141,375 reproductive-age patients who were active at a large multi-hospital health system between June 24, 2021 and June 25, 2023. The primary outcome was the proportion of active patients undergoing sterilization in the year following the Supreme Court's ruling (June 2022-June 2023, "Post- Results: The proportion of patients undergoing permanent contraception was 2.34% in the "Post- Conclusion: The proportion of patients undergoing permanent contraception increased following the Implications: These findings suggest an association between restrictive abortion policies and increased utilization of permanent contraception in South Carolina, with continued rise over the subsequent year. Demographic shifts among patients undergoing sterilization warrant continued monitoring, particularly as funding and state abortion policies continue to evolve.

Indexed as

abortion accessDobbs v Jacksonpermanent contraceptionroe v wadeSouth Carolinasterilization

Identifiers

PMID42845752
PMCPMC13642272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.