Accuracy and Misleadingness of Anatomical and Embryological Statements in State‐Level Abortion Ban Legislation in the United States
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6444917 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rachel N Feltman (New York Institute of Technology), Steven R Lewis, Nathan E Thompson (0000-0002-9273-3636, New York Institute of Technology) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 17-24 |
| Publication date | 2025-02-28 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1538-6341 • E-ISSN: 1931-2393 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/psrh.70001 |
| PMID | 40018954 |
| OpenAlex | W4408070161 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 30 |
Objective : In the last 15 years, the United States has seen a surge in anti‐abortion legislation enacted at the state level. Many of these pieces of legislation utilize anatomical and embryological details to justify the necessity of abortion bans. In this study, we evaluated the level to which these statements are accurate and/or misleading, if at all, as determined by experts in anatomy and embryology. Methods : Experts evaluated statements of anatomical and embryological fact included in Legislative Findings (or equivalent) sections of state‐level abortion ban legislation passed between January 2016 and January 2023 on their level of accuracy and misleadingness. We investigated 56 pieces of legislation from 23 states, which resulted in 57 testable statements common to 13 pieces of legislation across 12 states. Forty‐one experts in anatomy and embryology rated each statement from 1 (completely inaccurate/misleading) to 5 (completely accurate/non‐misleading). Results : Mean accuracy for all 57 statements was 3.0 ± 1.2 (range: 1.4–4.3) and the overall level of misleadingness was 2.5 ± 1.2 (range: 1.3–3.8). Conclusion : All 57 statements were significantly different from a null expectation of completely accurate and completely non‐misleading. Statements made about anatomy and embryology aim to justify abortion bans but contain, to varying extents, inaccurate and misleading information, thereby contributing to the detrimental effects of restrictive abortion legislation on the health and well‐being of pregnancy‐capable people
Abortion · Biology · Legislation · Political science · Pregnancy · Programming language · State (computer science · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Reproductive Health and Contraception · Reproductive Health and Technologies · Genetics
The association between reproductive rights and access to abortion services and mental health among US women
Laws Restricting Access to Abortion Services and Infant Mortality Risk in the United States
Side Effects, Physical Health Consequences, and Mortality Associated with Abortion and Birth after an Unwanted Pregnancy
Blurred Lines
Variation in Restrictive Abortion Policies and Adverse Birth Outcomes in the United States from 2005 to 2015
Do Fetal Development Markers Influence Attitudes toward Abortion Legality
Friendship and the Political
Does Gender Matter
Gender and Abortion Attitudes
Religion among Academic Scientists
Stasis and Sorting of Americans' Abortion Opinions
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |