ArticleHealth equity2025
No-Test Screening Protocols May Disproportionately Exclude Structurally Oppressed Communities Who Could Benefit from Accessing Medication Abortion.
Article in Health equity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived Importance of Abortion Care Features and Access to Telehealth Technologies Among Medication Abortion Patients by Abortion Care Model: Cross-Sectional Analysis of a Prospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Examining the association between prior medical mistreatment and interest in and support for over-the-counter medication abortion among people seeking in-person abortion in the United States.BMC health services research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore disparities in ineligibility for medication abortion using no-test screening criteria compared with assessment with testing including ultrasound. Methods: From June 2021 to December 2022, we surveyed patients ages ≥15 seeking abortion at nine recruitment facilities in eight U.S. states before ultrasound; clinicians assessed patients' eligibility for medication abortion with ultrasound and other testing. Using clinical guidelines and the no-test protocol criteria, we estimated (1) the proportion ineligible by no-test assessment (pregnancy duration and ectopic pregnancy risk factors as reported in patient surveys and clinician-reported assessment of other contraindications) and (2) the proportion ineligible using no-test criteria yet eligible with testing (false positives). We assessed associations between participant characteristics and ineligibility for medication abortion and reasons for ineligibility. Results: We approached 2,846 people, of whom 1,591 were eligible for the study. Of the 1,386 who consented and had complete clinician data, 21.1% (306/1,386) were ineligible with testing, 71.5% ( Conclusions: Screening criteria for no-test medication abortion may exclude many people who are eligible, disproportionately excluding certain population groups from getting the care they seek. More research is needed to improve screening criteria to ensure equitable access to no-test medication abortion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.