Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

No-Test Screening Protocols May Disproportionately Exclude Structurally Oppressed Communities Who Could Benefit from Accessing Medication Abortion

Bibliographic Data

ID19578098
AuthorsM Antonia Biggs (0000-0002-3904-3177, Ibis Reproductive Health, corresponding author), Lauren Ralph (0000-0001-7002-1024, Ibis Reproductive Health), Katherine Ehrenreich (0000-0002-8174-3863), Shelly Kaller (0000-0002-6648-7064, Ibis Reproductive Health), Kelly Blanchard (0000-0001-9691-0700, Ibis Reproductive Health), D S Hauser (Advocates for Youth), Deb Hauser (Advocates for Youth, Washington, District of Columbia, USA), Nathalie Kapp (0000-0002-9602-3674, International Planned Parenthood Federation), Tammi Kromenaker (Minnesota State University Moorhead), Ghazaleh Moayedi (0000-0002-4123-3412), Jamila Perritt (0000-0001-6063-0432, Institute for Reproductive Health), Elizabeth Raymond, Kari White (0000-0001-6463-8626, Institute for Reproductive Health), Daniel Grossman (0000-0002-6878-6201, Ibis Reproductive Health)
Year2025
Volume9
Issue1
Pages189-200
Publication date2025-08-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHealth Equity (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2473-1242 • E-ISSN: 2473-1242
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1089/heq.2024.0128
PMID40677649
OpenAlexW4408852195
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited28

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% ( n = 991/1,386) were ineligible using no-test criteria, and 51.4% ( n = 713/1,386) screened false positive. In adjusted analyses, ineligibility using no-test criteria was significantly greater among people ages 15–19 (86.8% [105/121] vs. 71.5% for full sample, p < 0.001) and experiencing food or housing insecurity (75.8% [525/690] vs. 67.2%[464/693], p < 0.01); people ages 20–24 were more likely to screen false positive (56.1% [263/469] vs. 51.4% for full sample [713/1,386], p = 0.03). Moderate/severe pelvic pain was the most common (614/1,386) patient-reported reason for ineligibility and reported significantly more by people ages 15–19, who were nulliparous, and experienced food or housing insecurity. 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

Abortion · Biology · Obstetrics · Pregnancy · Ectopic Pregnancy Diagnosis and Management · Medicine · Reproductive Health and Contraception · Reproductive System and Pregnancy · Genetics

  • Incidence of Ectopic Pregnancy and Diagnostic Accuracy of Ectopic Pregnancy Screening Criteria Among People Seeking Versus Not Seeking Abortion

    Open Access•M Antonia Biggs, Mary Anne Armstrong et al.•Women s Health Issues•2025

  • Addressing Health Equity and Social Determinants of Health Through Healthy People 2030

    Open Access•Cynthia Gómez, Cynthia A Gómez et al.•Journal of Public Health…•2021

  • Reproductive Justice

    Loretta Ross, Rickie Solinger•Reproductive Justice•2019

  • Health Disparities and Health Equity

    Paula A Braveman, Paula Braveman et al.•American Journal of Public Health•2011

Citations per year1
Citation span2025 - 2025 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae