一项法医调查,并对 Turnaway 研究中报告的自杀意念进行批判。

IF 0.4 Q4 MEDICAL ETHICS Linacre Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1177/00243639241281978
David C Reardon
{"title":"一项法医调查,并对 Turnaway 研究中报告的自杀意念进行批判。","authors":"David C Reardon","doi":"10.1177/00243639241281978","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a published report of suicidal ideation rates drawn from the Turnaway Study, the abortion advocacy group Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) asserted that their findings proved that abortion has no effect on suicidal ideation. Therefore, laws requiring notification of abortion's link to higher suicide rates were not based on good science. But how good is the science ANSIRH offers to displace the evidence of an abortion-suicide connection? The Turnaway Study upon which they rely is drawn from a non-random, non-representative convenience sample that suffered from a 68% refusal rate and a 50% attrition rate. No conclusions applicable to the general population of aborting women can be drawn from such a sample. Moreover, on closer examination, ANSIRH's suicidal ideation trajectory analysis is severely flawed and violates Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Basic and critical information is withheld, specifically the mean scores and number of women identified as having suicidal thoughts. Instead, readers are provided with only highly massaged results from a mixed-effects logistic regression employing thirteen covariates that appear to have been chosen precisely to water down the confidence intervals to such a high degree that virtually nothing was statistically significant. In addition, ANSIRH suggested that an attrition analysis of three of the covariates used strengthened the reliability of their finding. However, the fact that they chose not to report on attrition rates associated with the other ten covariates, much less the two outcome variables related to suicidal ideation, actually exposes the falsity of this reliability claim. Rather than proving that abortion has no effect on suicidal behaviors, ANSRIH's published analysis provides evidence of deliberate obfuscation and disinformation by a group funded and dedicated to the expansion of abortion rates around the world.</p>","PeriodicalId":44238,"journal":{"name":"Linacre Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":"00243639241281978"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11559533/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Forensic Investigation and Critique of Suicidal Ideation Reported in a Turnaway Study.\",\"authors\":\"David C Reardon\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00243639241281978\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In a published report of suicidal ideation rates drawn from the Turnaway Study, the abortion advocacy group Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) asserted that their findings proved that abortion has no effect on suicidal ideation. Therefore, laws requiring notification of abortion's link to higher suicide rates were not based on good science. But how good is the science ANSIRH offers to displace the evidence of an abortion-suicide connection? The Turnaway Study upon which they rely is drawn from a non-random, non-representative convenience sample that suffered from a 68% refusal rate and a 50% attrition rate. No conclusions applicable to the general population of aborting women can be drawn from such a sample. Moreover, on closer examination, ANSIRH's suicidal ideation trajectory analysis is severely flawed and violates Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Basic and critical information is withheld, specifically the mean scores and number of women identified as having suicidal thoughts. Instead, readers are provided with only highly massaged results from a mixed-effects logistic regression employing thirteen covariates that appear to have been chosen precisely to water down the confidence intervals to such a high degree that virtually nothing was statistically significant. In addition, ANSIRH suggested that an attrition analysis of three of the covariates used strengthened the reliability of their finding. However, the fact that they chose not to report on attrition rates associated with the other ten covariates, much less the two outcome variables related to suicidal ideation, actually exposes the falsity of this reliability claim. Rather than proving that abortion has no effect on suicidal behaviors, ANSRIH's published analysis provides evidence of deliberate obfuscation and disinformation by a group funded and dedicated to the expansion of abortion rates around the world.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linacre Quarterly\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"00243639241281978\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11559533/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linacre Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639241281978\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICAL ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linacre Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639241281978","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

堕胎倡导组织 "推进生殖健康新标准"(ANSIRH)在发表的一份关于特纳维研究得出的自杀意念率的报告中断言,他们的研究结果证明堕胎对自杀意念没有影响。因此,要求告知堕胎与较高自杀率之间联系的法律并非基于良好的科学依据。但是,ANSIRH 用来取代堕胎与自杀有关的证据的科学依据有多好?他们所依赖的 "特纳维研究"(Turnaway Study)是从一个非随机、非代表性的便利样本中提取的,该样本的拒绝率为 68%,自然减员率为 50%。从这样的样本中无法得出适用于广大堕胎妇女的结论。此外,经仔细研究,ANSIRH 的自杀意念轨迹分析存在严重缺陷,违反了《加强流行病学观察性研究报告》(STROBE)指南。该研究隐瞒了基本的关键信息,特别是平均得分和被确认有自杀想法的女性人数。取而代之的是,读者只能看到经过高度加工的混合效应逻辑回归结果,其中采用了 13 个协变量,而这些协变量的选择似乎正是为了缩小置信区间,以至于几乎没有任何结果具有统计学意义。此外,ANSIRH 还提出,对所使用的三个协变量进行自然减员分析可增强其结果的可靠性。然而,他们选择不报告与其他十个协变量相关的损耗率,更不用说与自杀意念相关的两个结果变量了,这实际上暴露了这种可靠性声明的虚假性。ANSRIH 公布的分析结果非但没有证明堕胎对自杀行为没有影响,反而提供了一些证据,证明这个组织蓄意混淆视听、造谣惑众,并为此提供资金,致力于在全球范围内扩大堕胎率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Forensic Investigation and Critique of Suicidal Ideation Reported in a Turnaway Study.

In a published report of suicidal ideation rates drawn from the Turnaway Study, the abortion advocacy group Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH) asserted that their findings proved that abortion has no effect on suicidal ideation. Therefore, laws requiring notification of abortion's link to higher suicide rates were not based on good science. But how good is the science ANSIRH offers to displace the evidence of an abortion-suicide connection? The Turnaway Study upon which they rely is drawn from a non-random, non-representative convenience sample that suffered from a 68% refusal rate and a 50% attrition rate. No conclusions applicable to the general population of aborting women can be drawn from such a sample. Moreover, on closer examination, ANSIRH's suicidal ideation trajectory analysis is severely flawed and violates Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. Basic and critical information is withheld, specifically the mean scores and number of women identified as having suicidal thoughts. Instead, readers are provided with only highly massaged results from a mixed-effects logistic regression employing thirteen covariates that appear to have been chosen precisely to water down the confidence intervals to such a high degree that virtually nothing was statistically significant. In addition, ANSIRH suggested that an attrition analysis of three of the covariates used strengthened the reliability of their finding. However, the fact that they chose not to report on attrition rates associated with the other ten covariates, much less the two outcome variables related to suicidal ideation, actually exposes the falsity of this reliability claim. Rather than proving that abortion has no effect on suicidal behaviors, ANSRIH's published analysis provides evidence of deliberate obfuscation and disinformation by a group funded and dedicated to the expansion of abortion rates around the world.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Linacre Quarterly
Linacre Quarterly MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
40.00%
发文量
57
期刊最新文献
Appalachia - Bridging the Opioid Epidemic Amid the Fentanyl Crisis. Challenges, Conflicts, and Opportunities. Philosophical and Moral Issues of Organ Transplantation at the Close of the Twentieth Century. God and the Imperfect Practice of Medicine. A Forensic Investigation and Critique of Suicidal Ideation Reported in a Turnaway Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1