Affiliation:
1. Department of Epidemiology Boston University School of Public Health Boston Massachusetts USA
2. Boston College School of Social Work Chestnut Hill Massachusetts USA
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundOn June 24th, 2022, the United States (US) Supreme Court's ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, et al. (hereafter, the Dobbs decision) removed federal‐level protections for induced abortion, sparking concerns about reproductive rights and health privacy. Although other pregnancy outcomes (e.g. spontaneous abortion, ectopic pregnancy) are not explicit targets of post‐Dobbs abortion bans, study participants may be worried about how their reproductive health data are used by researchers in the post‐Dobbs era.ObjectiveTo evaluate the extent to which the Dobbs decision influenced participant's engagement in a preconception cohort study.MethodsWe leveraged data spanning 20 weeks before and after the Dobbs decision (4 February 2022, to 11 November 2022) from US participants in Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), an internet‐based prospective preconception cohort study of couples attempting conception. We categorised participants' state‐level abortion access by residential location: banned or restricted rights; limited access; and protected rights. We evaluated three participant engagement outcomes: follow‐up questionnaire completion; report of a pregnancy; and clicking on the invitation link for a fertility‐tracking app. We fit separate linear regression models and restricted cubic splines to compare outcome prevalence before and after the Dobbs decision by state‐level abortion category.ResultsA total of 585 newly enrolled participants and 1247 already‐enrolled participants received 2802 invitations to complete a follow‐up questionnaire. In states with limited or protected abortion rights, we observed little change in participant engagement. In states with banned or restricted abortion rights, however, we observed a 27.12 percentage point reduction (95% confidence interval −43.68, −10.51) in the prevalence of clicking on the invitation link for the fertility‐tracking app comparing the post‐ versus pre‐Dobbs periods.ConclusionsThere was some evidence of reduced participant engagement after the Dobbs decision in states with banned or restricted abortion rights, indicating potentially deleterious effects on the conduct of reproductive health studies.
Funder
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
NIH Office of the Director
Reference20 articles.
1. ThomasE.Dobbs State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health et al. v. Jackson Women's Health Organization et al. U.S. Supreme Court; 2022. Accesed June 8 2023.https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19‐1392_6j37.pdf
2. Guttmacher Institute.100 Days post‐roe: at least 66 clinics across 15 US states have stopped offering abortion care. 2022. Accessed January 23 2024.https://www.guttmacher.org/2022/10/100‐days‐post‐roe‐least‐66‐clinics‐across‐15‐us‐states‐have‐stopped‐offering‐abortion‐care
3. GersteinJ WardA.Exclusive: Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights draft opinion shows. POLITICO. 2022. Accessed October 13 2023.https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme‐court‐abortion‐draft‐opinion‐00029473
4. Health Care Access and Reproductive Rights
5. The US turns its back on women’s reproductive rights
Cited by
1 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