Tamil Kendall PhD , Pallavi Sriram MD , Amrit Parmar BA , Wendy V. Norman MD, MHSc
{"title":"加拿大报纸支持米非司酮药物流产,以改善AAAQ健康权框架的实现(2015-2019)。","authors":"Tamil Kendall PhD , Pallavi Sriram MD , Amrit Parmar BA , Wendy V. Norman MD, MHSc","doi":"10.1016/j.whi.2023.05.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In 2015, mifepristone in combination with misoprostol, the international gold standard for medication abortion, was approved for use in Canada. By 2019, all Canadian provinces had included the medication as a publicly insured health benefit.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Our content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage describes arguments in favor of or against medication abortion and the evolving regulatory framework for mifepristone from 6 months before regulatory approval until the last significant regulatory barrier to use was removed (2015–2019).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our study found an exceptionally high level of support for the approval of, introduction of, and removal of regulatory barriers to mifepristone for medication abortion. Of 402 pieces, 67% were pro-medication abortion, 25% presented balanced or neutral coverage, and only 8% presented solely anti-medication abortion viewpoints. Of the 761 individuals quoted, more than 90% made positive or neutral statements about medication abortion. Most pieces discussed medication abortion as a health issue and described how liberalization of the regulatory framework would improve abortion availability (68%), accessibility (87%), acceptability (34%), and quality (28%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Rather than formal balance, which presents contrasting arguments as equally valid even when the scientific evidence for one vastly outweighs the other, our study identified evidentiary balance, in which coverage aligned with the weight of evidence and expert opinion. Our results differ from analyses in other high-income countries (United Kingdom, United States) where media outlets frame abortion in relation to morality or electoral politics rather than as a health issue. The Canadian print media presented overwhelmingly favorable arguments toward the expansion of mifepristone medication abortion and framed the introduction and universal coverage of medication abortion as advancing the “Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability, and Quality” (AAAQ) Right to Health Framework that establishes international human rights standards for health information, facilities, goods, and services.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48039,"journal":{"name":"Womens Health Issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723001081/pdfft?md5=36454b459400b4547671e4e552556479&pid=1-s2.0-S1049386723001081-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Canadian Newspapers Support Mifepristone Medication Abortion to Improve Fulfillment of the AAAQ Right to Health Framework (2015–2019)\",\"authors\":\"Tamil Kendall PhD , Pallavi Sriram MD , Amrit Parmar BA , Wendy V. Norman MD, MHSc\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.whi.2023.05.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In 2015, mifepristone in combination with misoprostol, the international gold standard for medication abortion, was approved for use in Canada. By 2019, all Canadian provinces had included the medication as a publicly insured health benefit.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Our content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage describes arguments in favor of or against medication abortion and the evolving regulatory framework for mifepristone from 6 months before regulatory approval until the last significant regulatory barrier to use was removed (2015–2019).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our study found an exceptionally high level of support for the approval of, introduction of, and removal of regulatory barriers to mifepristone for medication abortion. Of 402 pieces, 67% were pro-medication abortion, 25% presented balanced or neutral coverage, and only 8% presented solely anti-medication abortion viewpoints. Of the 761 individuals quoted, more than 90% made positive or neutral statements about medication abortion. Most pieces discussed medication abortion as a health issue and described how liberalization of the regulatory framework would improve abortion availability (68%), accessibility (87%), acceptability (34%), and quality (28%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Rather than formal balance, which presents contrasting arguments as equally valid even when the scientific evidence for one vastly outweighs the other, our study identified evidentiary balance, in which coverage aligned with the weight of evidence and expert opinion. Our results differ from analyses in other high-income countries (United Kingdom, United States) where media outlets frame abortion in relation to morality or electoral politics rather than as a health issue. The Canadian print media presented overwhelmingly favorable arguments toward the expansion of mifepristone medication abortion and framed the introduction and universal coverage of medication abortion as advancing the “Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability, and Quality” (AAAQ) Right to Health Framework that establishes international human rights standards for health information, facilities, goods, and services.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48039,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Womens Health Issues\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723001081/pdfft?md5=36454b459400b4547671e4e552556479&pid=1-s2.0-S1049386723001081-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Womens Health Issues\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723001081\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Womens Health Issues","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1049386723001081","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Canadian Newspapers Support Mifepristone Medication Abortion to Improve Fulfillment of the AAAQ Right to Health Framework (2015–2019)
Background
In 2015, mifepristone in combination with misoprostol, the international gold standard for medication abortion, was approved for use in Canada. By 2019, all Canadian provinces had included the medication as a publicly insured health benefit.
Methods
Our content analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage describes arguments in favor of or against medication abortion and the evolving regulatory framework for mifepristone from 6 months before regulatory approval until the last significant regulatory barrier to use was removed (2015–2019).
Results
Our study found an exceptionally high level of support for the approval of, introduction of, and removal of regulatory barriers to mifepristone for medication abortion. Of 402 pieces, 67% were pro-medication abortion, 25% presented balanced or neutral coverage, and only 8% presented solely anti-medication abortion viewpoints. Of the 761 individuals quoted, more than 90% made positive or neutral statements about medication abortion. Most pieces discussed medication abortion as a health issue and described how liberalization of the regulatory framework would improve abortion availability (68%), accessibility (87%), acceptability (34%), and quality (28%).
Conclusions
Rather than formal balance, which presents contrasting arguments as equally valid even when the scientific evidence for one vastly outweighs the other, our study identified evidentiary balance, in which coverage aligned with the weight of evidence and expert opinion. Our results differ from analyses in other high-income countries (United Kingdom, United States) where media outlets frame abortion in relation to morality or electoral politics rather than as a health issue. The Canadian print media presented overwhelmingly favorable arguments toward the expansion of mifepristone medication abortion and framed the introduction and universal coverage of medication abortion as advancing the “Availability, Accessibility, Acceptability, and Quality” (AAAQ) Right to Health Framework that establishes international human rights standards for health information, facilities, goods, and services.
期刊介绍:
Women"s Health Issues (WHI) is a peer-reviewed, bimonthly, multidisciplinary journal that publishes research and review manuscripts related to women"s health care and policy. As the official journal of the Jacobs Institute of Women"s Health, it is dedicated to improving the health and health care of all women throughout the lifespan and in diverse communities. The journal seeks to inform health services researchers, health care and public health professionals, social scientists, policymakers, and others concerned with women"s health.