• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Post- Abortion Restrictions and the Families They Leave Behind.堕胎后限制措施及其对家庭的影响。
Am J Public Health. 2024 Oct;114(10):1043-1050. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792.
2
Provision of Medications for Self-Managed Abortion Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Decision.《多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案前后自行堕胎药物的供应》。
JAMA. 2024 May 14;331(18):1558-1564. doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.4266.
3
Use of Oral and Emergency Contraceptives After the US Supreme Court's Dobbs Decision.美国最高法院“多布斯案”判决后口服避孕药和紧急避孕药的使用情况。
JAMA Netw Open. 2024 Jun 3;7(6):e2418620. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18620.
4
Legal Risks and Ethical Dilemmas for Clinicians in the Aftermath of Dobbs.多布斯案余波下临床医生面临的法律风险与伦理困境
JAMA. 2022 Nov 1;328(17):1695-1696. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.18453.
5
Obstacles to Care Mount 1 Year After Dobbs Decision.多布斯案裁决一年后,医疗护理面临的障碍增多。
JAMA. 2023 Jul 11;330(2):119-120. doi: 10.1001/jama.2023.10151.
6
Societal implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案的社会影响。
Lancet. 2024 Jun 22;403(10445):2751-2754. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00534-8. Epub 2024 May 22.
7
Health-care workforce implications of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision.多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案对医疗保健劳动力的影响。
Lancet. 2024 Jun 22;403(10445):2747-2750. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00581-6. Epub 2024 May 22.
8
Post-Roe v Wade psychiatry: legal, clinical, and ethical challenges in psychiatry under abortion bans.罗诉韦德案推翻后精神病学:堕胎禁令下精神病学的法律、临床和伦理挑战。
Lancet Psychiatry. 2024 Oct;11(10):853-862. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00096-8. Epub 2024 May 22.
9
Longitudinal Impact of on Abortion Service Delivery in Ohio, 2022‒2023.2022-2023 年俄亥俄州对堕胎服务提供的纵向影响。
Am J Public Health. 2024 Oct;114(10):1034-1042. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2024.307775.
10
Unequal Spatial Consequences of Abortion Restrictions in Texas, 2021-2023.2021-2023 年,德克萨斯州堕胎限制的不平等空间后果。
Am J Public Health. 2024 Oct;114(10):1024-1033. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2024.307652. Epub 2024 May 23.

引用本文的文献

1
The relationship between state-level abortion policy and maternal mortality in the United States: a scoping review.美国州级堕胎政策与孕产妇死亡率之间的关系:一项范围综述
Health Aff Sch. 2025 Aug 14;3(8):qxaf146. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf146. eCollection 2025 Aug.

本文引用的文献

1
Requests for Self-managed Medication Abortion Provided Using Online Telemedicine in 30 US States Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Decision.在多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案裁决前后,美国30个州通过在线远程医疗提供自我管理药物流产的申请情况。
JAMA. 2022 Nov 1;328(17):1768-1770. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.18865.
2
Association of Availability of State Medicaid Coverage for Abortion With Abortion Access in the United States.美国各州医疗补助计划中堕胎覆盖范围与堕胎机会的关联。
Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Oct 1;140(4):623-630. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004933. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
3
Trends In Self-Pay Charges And Insurance Acceptance For Abortion In The United States, 2017-20.美国 2017-20 年堕胎自费费用和保险接受情况趋势
Health Aff (Millwood). 2022 Apr;41(4):507-515. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2021.01528.
4
Evaluation of Medicaid Expansion Under the Affordable Care Act and Contraceptive Care in US Community Health Centers.平价医疗法案下的医疗补助扩张评估和美国社区卫生中心的避孕服务。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Jun 1;3(6):e206874. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.6874.
5
Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Pregnancy-Related Deaths - United States, 2007-2016.妊娠相关死亡的种族/民族差异 - 美国,2007-2016 年。
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019 Sep 6;68(35):762-765. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6835a3.
6
ACOG Committee Opinion No. 733: Employment Considerations During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period.美国妇产科医师学会委员会意见 No.733:妊娠和产后期间的就业考虑。
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;131(4):e115-e123. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002589.
7
Epidemiology of racial/ethnic disparities in severe maternal morbidity and mortality.严重孕产妇发病率和死亡率的种族/民族差异的流行病学。
Semin Perinatol. 2017 Aug;41(5):258-265. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2017.04.001.
8
Race, socioeconomic status, and health: complexities, ongoing challenges, and research opportunities.种族、社会经济地位与健康:复杂性、持续存在的挑战与研究机遇。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010 Feb;1186:69-101. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05339.x.

堕胎后限制措施及其对家庭的影响。

Post- Abortion Restrictions and the Families They Leave Behind.

机构信息

At the time of this study, all authors were with the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL. Katie Watson is also with Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

出版信息

Am J Public Health. 2024 Oct;114(10):1043-1050. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792.

DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792
PMID:39231409
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11375356/
Abstract

The June 24, 2022 US Supreme Court decision in resulted in an expansive restriction on abortion access that had been constitutionally guaranteed for nearly half a century. Currently, 14 states have implemented complete bans on abortion with very limited exceptions, and an additional 7 states have implemented abortion bans at 6 to 18 weeks' gestation. It has been well demonstrated that restrictive policies disproportionately limit abortion access for minoritized people and people of low socioeconomic status; the financial and geographic barriers of these post- restrictions will only exacerbate this disparity. Proponents of abortion restrictions, who identify as pro-life, assert that these policies are essential to protect children, women, and families. We examine whether the protection of these groups extends past conception by evaluating the association between state abortion legislation and state-based policies and programs designed to provide medical and social support for children, women, and families. We found that states with the most restrictive post- abortion policies in fact have the least comprehensive and inclusive public infrastructure to support these groups. We suggest further opportunities for advocacy. (. 2024;114(10):1043-1050. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792).

摘要

2022 年 6 月 24 日,美国最高法院在 一案中的裁决导致对堕胎准入的广泛限制,而这一限制在宪法上已保障了近半个世纪。目前,14 个州已经完全禁止堕胎,只有非常有限的例外,另外 7 个州已经在怀孕 6 至 18 周时禁止堕胎。有充分的证据表明,限制性政策不成比例地限制了少数族裔和社会经济地位较低的人获得堕胎的机会;这些限制后的经济和地理障碍只会加剧这种差异。将自己定义为“生命权”的堕胎限制的支持者声称,这些政策对于保护儿童、妇女和家庭是必要的。我们通过评估州堕胎立法与旨在为儿童、妇女和家庭提供医疗和社会支持的州级政策和计划之间的关联,来考察这些群体的保护是否超出了受孕阶段。我们发现,实际上,堕胎后政策最严格的州,为这些群体提供的公共基础设施最不全面和包容。我们提出了进一步倡导的机会。(2024 年;114(10):1043-1050. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307792)。