Suppr超能文献

评估与多布斯裁决相关的孕前队列研究中参与者的参与度。

Evaluating participant engagement in a preconception cohort study in relation to the Dobbs decision.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Boston College School of Social Work, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, USA.

出版信息

Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2024 Sep;38(7):627-634. doi: 10.1111/ppe.13080. Epub 2024 Apr 26.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

On 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.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the extent to which the Dobbs decision influenced participant's engagement in a preconception cohort study.

METHODS

We 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.

RESULTS

A 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.

CONCLUSIONS

There 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.

摘要

背景

2022 年 6 月 24 日,美国(US)最高法院在多布斯诉杰克逊案(Dobbs v. Jackson,以下简称多布斯裁决)中的裁决取消了联邦层面对于人工流产的保护,引发了人们对于生殖权利和健康隐私的担忧。尽管其他妊娠结局(如自然流产、宫外孕)并非多布斯裁决后禁止堕胎的明确目标,但研究参与者可能担心他们的生殖健康数据在多布斯裁决后会被研究人员如何使用。

目的

评估多布斯裁决对参与者参与一项孕前队列研究的程度的影响。

方法

我们利用了 2022 年 4 月 2 日(星期二)至 2022 年 11 月 11 日(星期五)期间,来自美国参与妊娠在线研究(Pregnancy Study Online,PRESTO)的参与者的数据,这是一项针对尝试怀孕的夫妇的基于互联网的前瞻性孕前队列研究。我们根据居住地点将参与者的州级堕胎准入情况分为以下三类:禁止或限制权利;有限准入;和受保护权利。我们评估了三个参与者参与的结果:完成随访问卷;报告怀孕;以及点击生育跟踪应用程序的邀请链接。我们分别拟合了线性回归模型和限制三次样条函数,以比较多布斯裁决前后按州级堕胎类别划分的结果发生率。

结果

共有 585 名新入组的参与者和 1247 名已入组的参与者收到了 2802 份完成随访问卷的邀请。在有限或受保护的堕胎权利的州,我们观察到参与者参与度几乎没有变化。然而,在禁止或限制堕胎权利的州,我们观察到在多布斯裁决后与前相比,点击生育跟踪应用程序邀请链接的流行率降低了 27.12 个百分点(95%置信区间-43.68,-10.51)。

结论

在禁止或限制堕胎权利的州,多布斯裁决后参与者的参与度有一些减少的证据,这表明这可能对生殖健康研究的进行产生不利影响。

相似文献

1
Evaluating participant engagement in a preconception cohort study in relation to the Dobbs decision.
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2024 Sep;38(7):627-634. doi: 10.1111/ppe.13080. Epub 2024 Apr 26.
2
Assessing the impact of the decision on abortion attitudes by abortion identity labels: a mixed-methods longitudinal study.
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2025 Dec;33(1):2518669. doi: 10.1080/26410397.2025.2518669. Epub 2025 Jul 25.
5
Obstetrician and Gynecologist Physicians' Practice Locations Before and After the Dobbs Decision.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Apr 1;8(4):e251608. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.1608.
8
Changes in Support for Advance Provision and Over-the-Counter Access to Medication Abortion.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jan 2;8(1):e2454767. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54767.
9
Infant Deaths After Texas' 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy.
JAMA Pediatr. 2024 Aug 1;178(8):784-791. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2024.0885.
10
Obstetrics and gynecology resident experiences in an abortion-ban state post-Dobbs.
Contraception. 2025 Oct;150:111011. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2025.111011. Epub 2025 Jul 5.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
US Obstetrician-Gynecologists' Perceived Impacts of Post-Dobbs v Jackson State Abortion Bans.
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jan 2;7(1):e2352109. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.52109.
2
Ethical research when abortion access is legally restricted.
Science. 2023 Jun 23;380(6651):1224-1226. doi: 10.1126/science.adh3104. Epub 2023 Jun 22.
3
Global impacts of and abortion regression in the United States.
Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2022 Dec;30(1):2135574. doi: 10.1080/26410397.2022.2135574.
4
Health Care Access and Reproductive Rights.
JAMA. 2022 Nov 1;328(17):1707-1709. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.19172.
5
Abortion after Defendants, denials, and delays.
Sci Adv. 2022 Sep 9;8(36):eade5327. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.ade5327. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
6
The US turns its back on women's reproductive rights.
BMJ. 2022 May 17;377:o1206. doi: 10.1136/bmj.o1206.
7
Design and Conduct of an Internet-Based Preconception Cohort Study in North America: Pregnancy Study Online.
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2015 Jul;29(4):360-71. doi: 10.1111/ppe.12201.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验