Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
The impact on research findings that use pregnancy data from surveys with underreported abortions is not well-established. We estimate the percent of all pregnancies missing from women’s self-reported pregnancy histories because of abortion underreporting.
Methods
We obtained abortion and fetal loss data from the 2006–2015 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), annual counts of births from US vital statistics, and external abortion counts from the Guttmacher Institute. We estimated the completeness of abortion reporting in the NSFG as compared to the external counts, the proportion of pregnancies resolving in abortion, and the proportion of pregnancies missing in the NSFG due to missing abortions. Each measure was examined overall and by age, race/ethnicity, union status, and survey period.
Results
Fewer than half of abortions (40%, 95% CI 36–44) that occurred in the five calendar years preceding respondents’ interviews were reported in the NSFG. In 2006–2015, 18% of pregnancies resolved in abortion, with significant variation across demographic groups. Nearly 11% of pregnancies (95% CI 10–11) were missing from the 2006–2015 NSFG due to abortion underreporting. The extent of missing pregnancies varied across demographic groups and was highest among Black women and unmarried women (18% each); differences reflect both the patterns of abortion underreporting and the share of pregnancies ending in abortion.
Discussion
Incomplete reporting of pregnancy remains a fundamental shortcoming to the study of US fertility-related experiences. Efforts to improve abortion reporting are needed to strengthen the quality of pregnancy data to support maternal, child, and reproductive health research.
Funder
National Institutes of Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Obstetrics and Gynaecology,Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health,Epidemiology
Reference28 articles.
1. Ahrens, K. A., & Hutcheon, J. A. (2020). Time for better access to high quality abortion data in the US | request PDF. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwaa048
2. Bommaraju, A., Kavanaugh, M. L., Hou, M. Y., & Bessett, D. (2016). Situating stigma in stratified reproduction: Abortion stigma and miscarriage stigma as barriers to reproductive healthcare. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare, 10, 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2016.10.008
3. Fu, H., Darroch, J. E., Henshaw, S. K., & Kolb, E. (1998). Measuring the extent of abortion underreporting in the 1995 national survey of family growth. Family Planning Perspectives, 30(3), 128–138
4. Groves, R. M., Mosher, W. D., Lepkowski, J. M., & Kirgis, N. G. (2009). Planning and development of the continuous national survey of family growth. Vital and Health Statistics. Ser. 1 Programs and Collection Procedures, 48, 1–64
5. Hanschmidt, F., Linde, K., Hilbert, A., Riedel-Heller, S. G., & Kersting, A. (2016). Abortion stigma: A systematic review. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 48(4), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1363/48e8516
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献