Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, Harvard Medical School, the Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and the Department of Family Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts.
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Dec;132(6):1443-1452. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002950.
To assess the quality of information available online for abortion self-referral and to determine whether quality varies by region or distance to an abortion provider.
This was a cross-sectional study. We used a standard protocol to perform internet searches from August 2016 to June 2017 for abortion services in the 25 most populous U.S. cities and the 43 state capitals that were not one of the 25 most populous cities. We classified the first 10 webpage results and the first five map results and advertisements as facilitating abortion referral (local independent abortion provider, local Planned Parenthood facility, national abortion provider or organization, prochoice website, or abortion directory), not facilitating abortion referral (nonproviding physician office, nonmedical website, abortion provider greater than 50 miles from the location, news article, general directory, other), or hindering abortion referral (crisis pregnancy center or antichoice website). We used U.S. Census Bureau subregions to examine geographic differences. We made comparisons using a χ test.
Overall, from 612 searches from 68 cities, 52.9% of webpage results, 67.3% of map results, and 34.4% of advertisements facilitated abortion referral, whereas 12.9%, 21.7%, and 29.9%, respectively, hindered abortion referral. The content of the searches differed significantly based on U.S. Census Bureau subregion (all P≤.001) and distance to an abortion provider (all P≤.02).
Two thirds of map results facilitated abortion self-referral, whereas only half of webpage results did so. Advertisements were the least likely to facilitate and the most likely to hinder self-referral. Quality was lowest in areas that were farthest from abortion providers.
评估在线自行堕胎咨询信息的质量，并确定其质量是否因地区或与堕胎提供者的距离而异。
这是一项横断面研究。我们使用标准方案于 2016 年 8 月至 2017 年 6 月，在美国人口最多的 25 个城市和 43 个非人口最多的 25 个城市的州府中进行堕胎服务的互联网搜索。我们将前 10 个网页结果和前 5 个地图结果及广告分类为促进堕胎转介（当地独立堕胎提供者、当地计划生育设施、全国堕胎提供者或组织、支持选择网站或堕胎目录）、不促进堕胎转介（非提供医师办公室、非医疗网站、堕胎提供者距离地点超过 50 英里、新闻文章、总目录、其他）或阻碍堕胎转介（危机怀孕中心或反选择网站）。我们使用美国人口普查局分区来检查地理差异。我们使用 χ 检验进行比较。
总体而言，在 68 个城市的 612 次搜索中，52.9%的网页结果、67.3%的地图结果和 34.4%的广告促进了堕胎转介，而 12.9%、21.7%和 29.9%分别阻碍了堕胎转介。搜索内容根据美国人口普查局分区（均 P≤.001）和与堕胎提供者的距离（均 P≤.02）差异显著。
三分之二的地图结果促进了堕胎的自我转介，而只有一半的网页结果如此。广告最不可能促进自我转介，最有可能阻碍自我转介。质量在离堕胎提供者最远的地区最低。
