Kristen Lagasse Burke, Gracia Sierra, Klaira Lerma, Kari White
Context: The important role of Title X sites in supporting publicly funded reproductive healthcare was elevated during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many people experienced economic uncertainty and changed their fertility preferences. In this study, we assessed changes in service delivery during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at Title X-supported sites in Texas, a large state with a high uninsured rate and a diverse Title X network.
Methods: Using surveys of Title X-funded organizations in Texas from April and November 2020, we examined the percentage of organizations reporting service modifications. With administrative data on 507,947 client encounters between March 2019 and March 2021, we assessed change in client volume at the onset of the pandemic and evaluated the association between regional COVID-19 case rates and the provision of key Title X services.
Results: In April 2020, most organizations (78%) limited in-person operations while implementing telehealth (74%) and contactless contraception (67%). Network-wide encounter volume declined by 26% at pandemic onset (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65, 0.84). Health departments experienced the steepest declines in encounter volume (IRR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.36-0.50). Weekly encounters, particularly for long-acting reversible method placement/removal and sexually transmitted infection testing, decreased as COVID-19 rates increased.
Conclusions: Investment in public health infrastructure, including providing robust support to health departments as well as rebuilding and expanding the Title X network, is essential to safeguarding access to publicly funded reproductive healthcare during and after the pandemic.
{"title":"Service delivery at Title X sites in Texas during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Kristen Lagasse Burke, Gracia Sierra, Klaira Lerma, Kari White","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12211","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The important role of Title X sites in supporting publicly funded reproductive healthcare was elevated during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many people experienced economic uncertainty and changed their fertility preferences. In this study, we assessed changes in service delivery during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at Title X-supported sites in Texas, a large state with a high uninsured rate and a diverse Title X network.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using surveys of Title X-funded organizations in Texas from April and November 2020, we examined the percentage of organizations reporting service modifications. With administrative data on 507,947 client encounters between March 2019 and March 2021, we assessed change in client volume at the onset of the pandemic and evaluated the association between regional COVID-19 case rates and the provision of key Title X services.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In April 2020, most organizations (78%) limited in-person operations while implementing telehealth (74%) and contactless contraception (67%). Network-wide encounter volume declined by 26% at pandemic onset (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65, 0.84). Health departments experienced the steepest declines in encounter volume (IRR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.36-0.50). Weekly encounters, particularly for long-acting reversible method placement/removal and sexually transmitted infection testing, decreased as COVID-19 rates increased.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Investment in public health infrastructure, including providing robust support to health departments as well as rebuilding and expanding the Title X network, is essential to safeguarding access to publicly funded reproductive healthcare during and after the pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 4","pages":"198-207"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9199674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Courtney Kerestes, Rebecca Delafield, Jennifer Elia, Tara Shochet, Bliss Kaneshiro, Reni Soon
Context: Direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion allows people to receive mifepristone and misoprostol for medication abortion in their home without requiring an in-person visit with a healthcare provider. This method has high efficacy and safety, but less is known about the person-centered quality of care provided with telemedicine.
Methods: We interviewed 45 participants from the TelAbortion study of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion in the United States from January to July 2020. Semi-structured qualitative interviews queried their choices, barriers to care, expectations for care, actual abortion experience, and suggestions for improvement. We developed a codebook through an iterative, inductive process and performed content and thematic analyses.
Results: The experience of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion met the person-centered domains of dignity, autonomy, privacy, communication, social support, supportive care, trust, and environment. Four themes relate to the person-centered framework for reproductive health equity: (1) Participants felt well-supported and safe with TelAbortion; (2) Participants had autonomy in their care which led to feelings of empowerment; (3) TelAbortion exceeded expectations; and (4) Challenges arose when interfacing with the healthcare system outside of TelAbortion. Participants perceived abortion stigma which often led them to avoid traditional care and experienced enacted stigma during encounters with non-study healthcare workers.
Conclusion: TelAbortion is a high quality, person-centered care model that can empower patients seeking care in an increasingly challenging abortion context.
{"title":"Person-centered, high-quality care from a distance: A qualitative study of patient experiences of TelAbortion, a model for direct-to-patient medication abortion by mail in the United States.","authors":"Courtney Kerestes, Rebecca Delafield, Jennifer Elia, Tara Shochet, Bliss Kaneshiro, Reni Soon","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12210","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion allows people to receive mifepristone and misoprostol for medication abortion in their home without requiring an in-person visit with a healthcare provider. This method has high efficacy and safety, but less is known about the person-centered quality of care provided with telemedicine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We interviewed 45 participants from the TelAbortion study of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion in the United States from January to July 2020. Semi-structured qualitative interviews queried their choices, barriers to care, expectations for care, actual abortion experience, and suggestions for improvement. We developed a codebook through an iterative, inductive process and performed content and thematic analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The experience of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion met the person-centered domains of dignity, autonomy, privacy, communication, social support, supportive care, trust, and environment. Four themes relate to the person-centered framework for reproductive health equity: (1) Participants felt well-supported and safe with TelAbortion; (2) Participants had autonomy in their care which led to feelings of empowerment; (3) TelAbortion exceeded expectations; and (4) Challenges arose when interfacing with the healthcare system outside of TelAbortion. Participants perceived abortion stigma which often led them to avoid traditional care and experienced enacted stigma during encounters with non-study healthcare workers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TelAbortion is a high quality, person-centered care model that can empower patients seeking care in an increasingly challenging abortion context.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 4","pages":"177-187"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10686088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alicia VandeVusse, Philicia W Castillo, Marielle Kirstein, Jennifer Mueller, Megan Kavanaugh
Context: The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly disrupted the provision of sexual and reproductive health care in the United States.
Methods: We conducted interviews with family planning clinic staff at 55 health care facilities in Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin in late 2020 and early 2021. We asked respondents about the challenges they faced and ways they adapted their service provision as a result of the pandemic. We conducted content and thematic analyses of the interview transcripts using an inductively developed qualitative coding scheme.
Results: Family planning clinics and providers made a variety of changes to their clinic operations and service delivery. The three major areas of change for these facilities were implementation of COVID-19 safety procedures, shifting service delivery and staffing to meet patient needs, and the rapid uptake and expansion of telehealth.
Conclusion: While providers faced many challenges, they also described opportunities to innovate and rethink standard of care protocols that may continue to shape sexual and reproductive health care even after the pandemic abates.
{"title":"Disruptions and opportunities in sexual and reproductive health care: How COVID-19 impacted service provision in three US states.","authors":"Alicia VandeVusse, Philicia W Castillo, Marielle Kirstein, Jennifer Mueller, Megan Kavanaugh","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12213","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly disrupted the provision of sexual and reproductive health care in the United States.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted interviews with family planning clinic staff at 55 health care facilities in Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin in late 2020 and early 2021. We asked respondents about the challenges they faced and ways they adapted their service provision as a result of the pandemic. We conducted content and thematic analyses of the interview transcripts using an inductively developed qualitative coding scheme.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Family planning clinics and providers made a variety of changes to their clinic operations and service delivery. The three major areas of change for these facilities were implementation of COVID-19 safety procedures, shifting service delivery and staffing to meet patient needs, and the rapid uptake and expansion of telehealth.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While providers faced many challenges, they also described opportunities to innovate and rethink standard of care protocols that may continue to shape sexual and reproductive health care even after the pandemic abates.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 4","pages":"188-197"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9878085/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9187192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Danny Valdez, Kristen N Jozkowski, María S Montenegro, Brandon L Crawford, Frederica Jackson
Introduction: Although debate remains about the saliency and relevance of pro-choice and pro-life labels (as abortion belief indicators), they have been consistently used for decades to broadly designate abortion identity. However, clear labels are less apparent in other languages (e.g., Spanish). Social media, as an exploratory data science tool, can be leveraged to identify the presence and popularity of online abortion identity labels and how they are contextualized online.
Purpose: This study aims to determine how popularly used Spanish-language pro-choice and pro-life identity labels are contextualized online.
Method: We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic models, an unsupervised natural language processing (NLP) application, to generate themes about Spanish language tweets categorized by Spanish abortion identity labels: (1) proelección (pro-choice); (2) derecho a decidir (right to choose); (3) proaborto (pro-abortion); (4) provida (pro-life); (5) antiaborto (anti-abortion); and (6) derecho a vivir (right to life). We manually reviewed themes for each identity label to assess scope.
Results: All six identity labels included in our analysis contained some references to abortion. However, several labels were not exclusive to abortion. Proelección (pro-choice), for example, contained several themes related to ongoing presidential elections.
Discussion and conclusion: No singular Spanish abortion identity label encapsulates abortion beliefs; however, there are several viable options. Just as the debate remains ongoing about pro-choice and pro-life as accurate indicators of abortion beliefs in English, we must also consider that identity is more complex than binary labels in Spanish.
导言:尽管关于支持选择和支持生命标签(作为堕胎信仰指标)的显著性和相关性的争论仍然存在,但几十年来,它们一直被广泛地用于广泛地指定堕胎身份。然而,在其他语言(如西班牙语)中,清晰的标签就不那么明显了。社交媒体作为一种探索性的数据科学工具,可以用来识别在线堕胎身份标签的存在和受欢迎程度,以及它们是如何在网上被语境化的。目的:本研究旨在确定流行的西班牙语支持选择和支持生命的身份标签是如何在网上语境化的。方法:我们使用潜狄利克雷分配(Latent Dirichlet Allocation, LDA)主题模型(一种无监督自然语言处理(NLP)应用程序)来生成关于西班牙语推文的主题,这些推文被西班牙堕胎身份标签分类:(1)proelección (pro-choice);(二)取消选择权;(三)赞成堕胎;(四)提供(反堕胎);(5)反堕胎(anti- aborto);(6) derecho a vivir(生命权)。我们手动审查每个身份标签的主题以评估范围。结果:我们分析的6个身份标签都包含一些堕胎的内容。然而,有几个标签并不是堕胎所独有的。例如,Proelección(支持选择)载有与正在进行的总统选举有关的若干主题。讨论与结论:没有单一的西班牙堕胎身份标签可以概括堕胎信仰;然而,有几个可行的选择。就像英语中支持选择和反对堕胎是否能准确反映堕胎信仰的争论仍在继续一样,我们也必须考虑到,身份认同比西班牙语中的二元标签要复杂得多。
{"title":"Identifying accurate pro-choice and pro-life identity labels in Spanish: Social media insights and implications for comparative survey research.","authors":"Danny Valdez, Kristen N Jozkowski, María S Montenegro, Brandon L Crawford, Frederica Jackson","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12208","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Although debate remains about the saliency and relevance of pro-choice and pro-life labels (as abortion belief indicators), they have been consistently used for decades to broadly designate abortion identity. However, clear labels are less apparent in other languages (e.g., Spanish). Social media, as an exploratory data science tool, can be leveraged to identify the presence and popularity of online abortion identity labels and how they are contextualized online.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to determine how popularly used Spanish-language pro-choice and pro-life identity labels are contextualized online.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic models, an unsupervised natural language processing (NLP) application, to generate themes about Spanish language tweets categorized by Spanish abortion identity labels: (1) proelección (pro-choice); (2) derecho a decidir (right to choose); (3) proaborto (pro-abortion); (4) provida (pro-life); (5) antiaborto (anti-abortion); and (6) derecho a vivir (right to life). We manually reviewed themes for each identity label to assess scope.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All six identity labels included in our analysis contained some references to abortion. However, several labels were not exclusive to abortion. Proelección (pro-choice), for example, contained several themes related to ongoing presidential elections.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>No singular Spanish abortion identity label encapsulates abortion beliefs; however, there are several viable options. Just as the debate remains ongoing about pro-choice and pro-life as accurate indicators of abortion beliefs in English, we must also consider that identity is more complex than binary labels in Spanish.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 4","pages":"166-176"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/4f/18/PSRH-54-166.PMC10092859.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9666542","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bonnie Song, Angel Boulware, Zarina Jaffer Wong, Iris Huang, Amy K Whitaker, Lee Hasselbacher, Debra Stulberg
Context: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the provision of contraception through telemedicine. This qualitative study describes provider perceptions of how telemedicine provision of contraception has impacted patient care.
Methods: We interviewed 40 obstetrics-gynecology and family medicine physicians, midwives, nurse practitioners, and support staff providing contraception via telemedicine in practices across Illinois, including Planned Parenthood of Illinois (PPIL) health centers. We analyzed interview content to identify themes around the perceived impact of telemedicine implementation on contraception access, contraceptive counseling, patient privacy, and provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).
Results: Participants perceived that telemedicine implementation improved care by increasing contraception access, increasing focus on counseling while reducing bias, and allowing easier method switching. Participants thought disparities in telemedicine usage and limitations to the technological interface presented barriers to patient care. Participants' perceptions of how telemedicine implementation impacts patient privacy and LARC provision were mixed. Some participants found telemedicine implementation enhanced privacy, while others felt unable to ensure privacy in a virtual space. Participants found telemedicine modalities useful for counseling patients considering methods of LARC, but they sometimes presented an unnecessary extra step for those sure about receiving one at a practice offering same day insertion.
Conclusion: Providers felt telemedicine provision of contraception positively impacted patient care. Improvements to counseling and easier access to method switching suggest that telemedicine implementation may help reduce contraceptive coercion. Our findings highlight the need to integrate LARC care with telemedicine workflows, improve patient privacy protections, and promote equitable access to all telemedicine modalities.
{"title":"\"This has definitely opened the doors\": Provider perceptions of patient experiences with telemedicine for contraception in Illinois.","authors":"Bonnie Song, Angel Boulware, Zarina Jaffer Wong, Iris Huang, Amy K Whitaker, Lee Hasselbacher, Debra Stulberg","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12207","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12207","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic increased the provision of contraception through telemedicine. This qualitative study describes provider perceptions of how telemedicine provision of contraception has impacted patient care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We interviewed 40 obstetrics-gynecology and family medicine physicians, midwives, nurse practitioners, and support staff providing contraception via telemedicine in practices across Illinois, including Planned Parenthood of Illinois (PPIL) health centers. We analyzed interview content to identify themes around the perceived impact of telemedicine implementation on contraception access, contraceptive counseling, patient privacy, and provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants perceived that telemedicine implementation improved care by increasing contraception access, increasing focus on counseling while reducing bias, and allowing easier method switching. Participants thought disparities in telemedicine usage and limitations to the technological interface presented barriers to patient care. Participants' perceptions of how telemedicine implementation impacts patient privacy and LARC provision were mixed. Some participants found telemedicine implementation enhanced privacy, while others felt unable to ensure privacy in a virtual space. Participants found telemedicine modalities useful for counseling patients considering methods of LARC, but they sometimes presented an unnecessary extra step for those sure about receiving one at a practice offering same day insertion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Providers felt telemedicine provision of contraception positively impacted patient care. Improvements to counseling and easier access to method switching suggest that telemedicine implementation may help reduce contraceptive coercion. Our findings highlight the need to integrate LARC care with telemedicine workflows, improve patient privacy protections, and promote equitable access to all telemedicine modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 3","pages":"80-89"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9826464/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10499096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Context: Compared with the general population in Australia, men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) have higher rates of HIV and sexually transmissible infections (STIs). Despite widespread advice to test regularly, a minority of these men remain "hard to reach." We undertook qualitative interviews with a group of such men in Sydney to better understand their views and experiences in relation to sexual health screening.
Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with men engaging with HIV/STI screening services at a sex-on-premises-venue and the local Sexual Health Service in Greater Western Sydney. We analyzed these data for content and themes.
Results: Sexual behaviors and identities were diverse, often discordant and compartmentalized from everyday lives. Overall, reported HIV/STI knowledge was poor and men did not see themselves at risk of HIV/STIs regardless of sexual behavior. Men took calculated risks and balanced with pleasure and escapism. Reasons for avoidance of testing included fear, unwillingness to disclose behavior, privacy concerns, and perceived low risk. Men viewed sexual health care as distinct from general health care. Service delivery preferences varied by service venue. Participants highlighted convenience, confidentiality, and trust as critical factors for a testing service.
Conclusion: A variety of testing options are needed to engage hard-to-reach MSM. Opportunities to enhance testing may include expanding health messaging, demystifying testing, and delinking sexual identity from sexual behavior and risk, thus promoting advantages of testing and establishing testing as standard of care.
{"title":"Engaging hard-to-reach men-who-have-sex-with-men with sexual health screening: Qualitative interviews in an Australian sex-on-premises-venue and sexual health service.","authors":"Catriona Ooi, David A Lewis, Christy E Newman","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12204","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12204","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Compared with the general population in Australia, men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) have higher rates of HIV and sexually transmissible infections (STIs). Despite widespread advice to test regularly, a minority of these men remain \"hard to reach.\" We undertook qualitative interviews with a group of such men in Sydney to better understand their views and experiences in relation to sexual health screening.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted semi-structured interviews with men engaging with HIV/STI screening services at a sex-on-premises-venue and the local Sexual Health Service in Greater Western Sydney. We analyzed these data for content and themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sexual behaviors and identities were diverse, often discordant and compartmentalized from everyday lives. Overall, reported HIV/STI knowledge was poor and men did not see themselves at risk of HIV/STIs regardless of sexual behavior. Men took calculated risks and balanced with pleasure and escapism. Reasons for avoidance of testing included fear, unwillingness to disclose behavior, privacy concerns, and perceived low risk. Men viewed sexual health care as distinct from general health care. Service delivery preferences varied by service venue. Participants highlighted convenience, confidentiality, and trust as critical factors for a testing service.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A variety of testing options are needed to engage hard-to-reach MSM. Opportunities to enhance testing may include expanding health messaging, demystifying testing, and delinking sexual identity from sexual behavior and risk, thus promoting advantages of testing and establishing testing as standard of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 3","pages":"116-124"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/96/7a/PSRH-54-116.PMC9804729.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10483463","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01Epub Date: 2022-04-20DOI: 10.1363/psrh.12191
Payal Chakraborty, Stef Murawsky, Mikaela H Smith, Michelle L McGowan, Alison H Norris, Danielle Bessett
Context: Since March 2021, the Ohio legislature has been actively considering laws that would ban abortion if the United States Supreme Court overturns the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally in 1973.
Methods: We used a national database of publicly advertised abortion facilities to calculate driving distances for Ohioans before and after the activation of proposed abortion bans. Using a legal analysis of abortion laws following the overturn of Roe, we determined which states surrounding Ohio would continue providing abortion care. We calculated distances from each Ohio county centroid to the nearest open abortion facility in three scenarios: (1) as of February 2022, (2) the best-case post-Roe scenario (two of the five surrounding states continue to offer abortion care), and (3) worst-case post-Roe scenario (no surrounding states continue to offer abortion care). We calculated population-weighted distances using county-level data about women aged 15-44 years from the 2019 American Community Survey.
Results: In February 2022, all Ohio county centroids were at most 99 miles from an abortion facility (median = 50 miles). The best-case post-Roe scenario shows 62 of Ohio's 88 counties to be 115-279 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 146). The worst-case shows 85 counties to be 191-339 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 264). The current average population-weighted driving distance from county centroid to the nearest facility is 26 miles; the post-Roe scenarios would increase this to 157 miles (best-case) or 269 miles (worst-case).
Conclusions: Ohio's proposed abortion bans would substantially increase travel distances to abortion care, impacting over 2.2 million reproductive-aged Ohioans.
{"title":"How Ohio's proposed abortion bans would impact travel distance to access abortion care.","authors":"Payal Chakraborty, Stef Murawsky, Mikaela H Smith, Michelle L McGowan, Alison H Norris, Danielle Bessett","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12191","DOIUrl":"10.1363/psrh.12191","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Since March 2021, the Ohio legislature has been actively considering laws that would ban abortion if the United States Supreme Court overturns the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationally in 1973.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a national database of publicly advertised abortion facilities to calculate driving distances for Ohioans before and after the activation of proposed abortion bans. Using a legal analysis of abortion laws following the overturn of Roe, we determined which states surrounding Ohio would continue providing abortion care. We calculated distances from each Ohio county centroid to the nearest open abortion facility in three scenarios: (1) as of February 2022, (2) the best-case post-Roe scenario (two of the five surrounding states continue to offer abortion care), and (3) worst-case post-Roe scenario (no surrounding states continue to offer abortion care). We calculated population-weighted distances using county-level data about women aged 15-44 years from the 2019 American Community Survey.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In February 2022, all Ohio county centroids were at most 99 miles from an abortion facility (median = 50 miles). The best-case post-Roe scenario shows 62 of Ohio's 88 counties to be 115-279 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 146). The worst-case shows 85 counties to be 191-339 miles away from the nearest facility (median = 264). The current average population-weighted driving distance from county centroid to the nearest facility is 26 miles; the post-Roe scenarios would increase this to 157 miles (best-case) or 269 miles (worst-case).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ohio's proposed abortion bans would substantially increase travel distances to abortion care, impacting over 2.2 million reproductive-aged Ohioans.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 1","pages":"54-63"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9324164/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47032632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
People recognize they are pregnant at gestational ages ranging from implantation to delivery, yet there is no comprehensive study that identifies the prevalence of pregnancy recognition at different points across this spectrum in the United States. To help clinicians, policymakers, researchers, educators, and public health advocates understand what is known about the spectrum of pregnancy recognition, this commentary integrates key research in three types of literature that have not been brought together before—retrospective studies of people who carried a pregnancy to term, studies of pregnant people presenting for abortion care, and postpartum studies of people who did not recognize their pregnancy until between 20 weeks and delivery. Our commentary also offers a corrective to the psychiatric literature’s inaccurate description of later pregnancy recognition as “pregnancy denial,” which forecloses consideration of the physiological and sociological reasons a pregnancy might be undetected until after 20 weeks. The term “pregnancy recognition” does not have a standard definition, so in this commentary we repeat the meaning used by each article we discuss. For example, in some research “pregnancy recognition” refers to the gestational age at which a person self-reports that they knew they were pregnant, but that research does not specify whether the subject is referring to a personal conclusion based on the first missed period or other pregnancy symptoms, a positive result from a home pregnancy test, or receiving the news (or confirmation of a home test) via urine test or ultrasound from a physician. In addition, some of these studies do not ask respondents whether they are counting weeks from when they believe fertilization occurred, from the first day of their last menstrual period (LMP), or somewhere in between. There is also no standard definition of “late pregnancy recognition,” so we state the meaning each article discussed ascribes to this term as well. Research on “pregnancy recognition” typically treats this phenomenon as an instantaneous, binary process—an informational switch is flipped and an unrecognized pregnancy becomes a recognized pregnancy. However, Peacock and colleagues argue that pregnancy discovery should be understood as a complex process which includes the phases of assessing pregnancy risk, perceiving and correctly interpreting signs and symptoms, and seeking confirmation, and that pregnancy should be acknowledged as a socially constructed phenomenon as well as a biological reality. Similarly, Bell and Fissell suggest that the binary model of pregnant versus not pregnant does not capture many women’s* experiences and propose an alternate model that emphasizes ambiguities in determining or confirming a pregnancy. A liminal state is the period or process when one is betwixt and between different social states. The time between conception and delivery has been analyzed as a transformative liminal experience between being a no
{"title":"The frequency of pregnancy recognition across the gestational spectrum and its consequences in the United States","authors":"Katie Watson, C. Angelotta","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12192","url":null,"abstract":"People recognize they are pregnant at gestational ages ranging from implantation to delivery, yet there is no comprehensive study that identifies the prevalence of pregnancy recognition at different points across this spectrum in the United States. To help clinicians, policymakers, researchers, educators, and public health advocates understand what is known about the spectrum of pregnancy recognition, this commentary integrates key research in three types of literature that have not been brought together before—retrospective studies of people who carried a pregnancy to term, studies of pregnant people presenting for abortion care, and postpartum studies of people who did not recognize their pregnancy until between 20 weeks and delivery. Our commentary also offers a corrective to the psychiatric literature’s inaccurate description of later pregnancy recognition as “pregnancy denial,” which forecloses consideration of the physiological and sociological reasons a pregnancy might be undetected until after 20 weeks. The term “pregnancy recognition” does not have a standard definition, so in this commentary we repeat the meaning used by each article we discuss. For example, in some research “pregnancy recognition” refers to the gestational age at which a person self-reports that they knew they were pregnant, but that research does not specify whether the subject is referring to a personal conclusion based on the first missed period or other pregnancy symptoms, a positive result from a home pregnancy test, or receiving the news (or confirmation of a home test) via urine test or ultrasound from a physician. In addition, some of these studies do not ask respondents whether they are counting weeks from when they believe fertilization occurred, from the first day of their last menstrual period (LMP), or somewhere in between. There is also no standard definition of “late pregnancy recognition,” so we state the meaning each article discussed ascribes to this term as well. Research on “pregnancy recognition” typically treats this phenomenon as an instantaneous, binary process—an informational switch is flipped and an unrecognized pregnancy becomes a recognized pregnancy. However, Peacock and colleagues argue that pregnancy discovery should be understood as a complex process which includes the phases of assessing pregnancy risk, perceiving and correctly interpreting signs and symptoms, and seeking confirmation, and that pregnancy should be acknowledged as a socially constructed phenomenon as well as a biological reality. Similarly, Bell and Fissell suggest that the binary model of pregnant versus not pregnant does not capture many women’s* experiences and propose an alternate model that emphasizes ambiguities in determining or confirming a pregnancy. A liminal state is the period or process when one is betwixt and between different social states. The time between conception and delivery has been analyzed as a transformative liminal experience between being a no","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 1","pages":"32 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43514409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION The social context of pregnancy decision-making has changed in recent decades in the United States (US), but little research has examined how these changes manifest in the context of infant adoption. METHODS To create an updated profile of US birth mothers, this analysis uses demographic data collected and aggregated from six adoption agencies, with information on 8658 private adoptions that occurred between 2011 and 2020. RESULTS Based on this sample, birth mothers today are older and more racially and ethnically diverse than counterparts in previous generations; a majority have other had children and a substantial proportion were parenting other children at the time of relinquishment. They report living on low incomes and, when considered with other measures (e.g., employment, health insurance, homelessness), seem to lack the economic resources that would give them meaningful power over the options available to themselves and their children. Most birth mothers contact agencies late in their pregnancies or after delivery, at a point when abortion care is likely inaccessible or unavailable. An important minority of birth mothers will relinquish more than one infant for adoption over the course of their reproductive lives. CONCLUSION Given the underlying shift in the demographic profile of women who relinquish infants, it is likely that the underlying circumstances that lead to adoption have also diverged. More research is needed into how women make decisions about adoption; such research carries implications for how best to support women's decision-making and ensure access to needed services throughout pregnancy and beyond.
{"title":"Who are the women who relinquish infants for adoption? Domestic adoption and contemporary birth motherhood in the United States.","authors":"G. Sisson","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12193","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12193","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\u0000The social context of pregnancy decision-making has changed in recent decades in the United States (US), but little research has examined how these changes manifest in the context of infant adoption.\u0000\u0000\u0000METHODS\u0000To create an updated profile of US birth mothers, this analysis uses demographic data collected and aggregated from six adoption agencies, with information on 8658 private adoptions that occurred between 2011 and 2020.\u0000\u0000\u0000RESULTS\u0000Based on this sample, birth mothers today are older and more racially and ethnically diverse than counterparts in previous generations; a majority have other had children and a substantial proportion were parenting other children at the time of relinquishment. They report living on low incomes and, when considered with other measures (e.g., employment, health insurance, homelessness), seem to lack the economic resources that would give them meaningful power over the options available to themselves and their children. Most birth mothers contact agencies late in their pregnancies or after delivery, at a point when abortion care is likely inaccessible or unavailable. An important minority of birth mothers will relinquish more than one infant for adoption over the course of their reproductive lives.\u0000\u0000\u0000CONCLUSION\u0000Given the underlying shift in the demographic profile of women who relinquish infants, it is likely that the underlying circumstances that lead to adoption have also diverged. More research is needed into how women make decisions about adoption; such research carries implications for how best to support women's decision-making and ensure access to needed services throughout pregnancy and beyond.","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44294742","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Context In the United States, third‐trimester abortions are substantially more expensive, difficult to obtain, and stigmatized than first‐trimester abortions. However, the circumstances that lead to someone needing a third‐trimester abortion may have overlaps with the pathways to abortion at other gestations. Methods I interviewed 28 cisgender women who obtained an abortion after the 24th week of pregnancy using a modified timeline interview method. I coded the interviews thematically, focusing on characterizing the experience of deciding to obtain a third‐trimester abortion. Results I find two pathways to needing a third‐trimester abortion: new information, wherein the respondent learned new information about the pregnancy—such as of an observed serious fetal health issue or that she was pregnant—that made the pregnancy not (or no longer) one she wanted to continue; and barriers to abortion, wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization. These two pathways were not wholly distinct and sometimes overlapped. Conclusions The inherent limits of medical knowledge and the infeasibility of ensuring early pregnancy recognition in all cases illustrate the impossibility of eliminating the need for third‐trimester abortion. The similarities between respondents' experiences and that of people seeking abortion at other gestations, particularly regarding the impact of barriers to abortion, point to the value of a social conceptualization of need for abortion that eschews a trimester or gestation‐based framework and instead conceptualizes abortion as an option throughout pregnancy.
{"title":"Is third‐trimester abortion exceptional? Two pathways to abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy in the United States","authors":"K. Kimport","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12190","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12190","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Context In the United States, third‐trimester abortions are substantially more expensive, difficult to obtain, and stigmatized than first‐trimester abortions. However, the circumstances that lead to someone needing a third‐trimester abortion may have overlaps with the pathways to abortion at other gestations. Methods I interviewed 28 cisgender women who obtained an abortion after the 24th week of pregnancy using a modified timeline interview method. I coded the interviews thematically, focusing on characterizing the experience of deciding to obtain a third‐trimester abortion. Results I find two pathways to needing a third‐trimester abortion: new information, wherein the respondent learned new information about the pregnancy—such as of an observed serious fetal health issue or that she was pregnant—that made the pregnancy not (or no longer) one she wanted to continue; and barriers to abortion, wherein the respondent was in the third trimester by the time she was able to surmount the obstacles to abortion she faced, including cost, finding a provider, and stigmatization. These two pathways were not wholly distinct and sometimes overlapped. Conclusions The inherent limits of medical knowledge and the infeasibility of ensuring early pregnancy recognition in all cases illustrate the impossibility of eliminating the need for third‐trimester abortion. The similarities between respondents' experiences and that of people seeking abortion at other gestations, particularly regarding the impact of barriers to abortion, point to the value of a social conceptualization of need for abortion that eschews a trimester or gestation‐based framework and instead conceptualizes abortion as an option throughout pregnancy.","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"54 1","pages":"38 - 45"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8,"publicationDate":"2022-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45865828","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}