Barriers and delays in access to abortion care: a cross-sectional study of people traveling to obtain care in England and the Netherlands from European countries where abortion is legal on broad grounds.

INTRODUCTION: This study characterized the extent to which (1) financial barriers and (2) abortion care-seeking within a person's country of residence were associated with delays in abortion access among those travelling to England and the Netherlands for abortion care from European countries where abortion is legal on broad grounds in the first trimester but where access past the first trimester is limited to specific circumstances. METHODOLOGY: We drew on cross-sectional survey data collected at five abortion clinics in England and the Netherlands from 2017 to 2019 (n = 164). We assessed the relationship between difficulty paying for the abortion/travel, acute financial insecurity, and in-country care seeking on delays to abortion using multivariable discrete-time hazards models. RESULTS: Participants who reported facing both difficulty paying for the abortion procedure and/or travel and difficulty covering basic living costs in the last month reported longer delays in accessing care than those who had no financial difficulty (adjusted hazard odds ratio: 0.39 95% CI 0.21-0.74). This group delayed paying other expenses (39%) or sold something of value (13%) to fund their abortion, resulting in ~ 60% of those with financial difficulty reporting it took them over a week to raise the funds needed for their abortion. Having contacted or visited an abortion provider in the country of residence was associated with delays in presenting abroad for an abortion. DISCUSSION: These findings point to inequities in access to timely abortion care based on socioeconomic status. Legal time limits on abortion may intersect with individuals' interactions with the health care system to delay care.

This paper explores delays in accessing abortion care associated with financial and medical system barriers. We focus on residents of countries in Europe where abortion is available on broad grounds in the first trimester seeking abortion care outside of their country of residence. This study demonstrates an association between difficulty covering abortion costs for people facing financial insecurity and in-country care seeking and delays in accessing abortion abroad. Policy barriers, medical system barriers, as well as financial barriers may interact to delay access to care for people in European countries with broad grounds for abortion access in the first trimester but restrictions thereafter, especially for people later in pregnancy.

Respondent-Driven Sampling for Estimation of the Cumulative Lifetime Incidence of Abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa: A Methodological Assessment.

Respondent-driven sampling (RDS) is a potential strategy for addressing challenges in accurate estimation of abortion incidence, but it relies on often untested assumptions. We conducted an RDS study to estimate the cumulative lifetime incidence of abortion in Soweto, Johannesburg, South Africa (April-December 2018), to evaluate whether RDS assumptions were met, and to compare RDS estimates of incidence with estimates adjusted for employment and age based on census data. A total of 849 participants were recruited from 11 seed participants between April and December 2018. The assumption that individuals can identify target population members and the assumption of approximation of sampling with replacement was met. There were minor violations of the assumptions of seed independence from the final sample and reciprocity of ties. Assumptions of accurate degree reporting and random recruitment were not met. Failure to meet assumptions yielded a study sample with different employment characteristics than those of the target population; this could not be resolved by standard RDS methods. The RDS estimate of cumulative lifetime abortion incidence was 12.1% (95% confidence interval: 9.8, 14.3), and the employment-adjusted estimate was 16.9% (95% confidence interval: 12.8, 22.1). We caution researchers in using RDS for representative estimates of abortion incidence. Use of postsurvey weights to adjust for differences in characteristics between the sample and the target population may yield more representative results.

Accounting for Misclassification and Selection Bias in Estimating Effectiveness of Self-managed Medication Abortion.

BACKGROUND: Studies on the effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion may suffer from misclassification and selection bias due to self-reported outcomes and loss of follow-up. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis can estimate self-managed abortion effectiveness accounting for these potential biases. METHODS: We conducted a Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis based on data from the Studying Accompaniment model Feasibility and Effectiveness Study (the SAFE Study), to generate bias-adjusted estimates of the effectiveness of self-managed abortion with accompaniment group support. Between July 2019 and April 2020, we enrolled a total of 1051 callers who contacted accompaniment groups in Argentina and Nigeria for self-managed abortion information; 961 took abortion medications and completed at least one follow-up. Using these data, we calculated measures of effectiveness adjusted for ineligibility, misclassification, and selection bias across 50,000 simulations with bias parameters drawn from pre-specified Beta distributions in R. RESULTS: After accounting for the potential influence of various sources of bias, bias-adjusted estimates of effectiveness were similar to observed estimates, conditional on chosen bias parameters: 92.68% (95% simulation interval: 87.80%, 95.74%) for mifepristone in combination with misoprostol (versus 93.7% in the observed data) and 98.47% (95% simulation interval: 96.79%, 99.39%) for misoprostol alone (versus 99.3% in the observed data). CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for multiple potential sources of bias, estimates of self-managed medication abortion effectiveness remain high. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis may be useful in studies measuring an epidemiologic proportion (i.e., effectiveness, prevalence, cumulative incidence) while accounting for possible selection or misclassification bias.

'To be vigilant to leave no trace': secrecy, invisibility and abortion travel from the Republic of Ireland.

Until 2018, abortion in the Republic of Ireland was banned in almost all circumstances under one of the most restrictive legal regimes in Europe. The main solution for Irish women and pregnant people seeking abortion services had been to pursue care abroad, typically in clinics in England. In this paper we focus on the hardships of waiting for abortion care experienced by Irish residents leading up to their travel for appointments in England in 2017 and 2018. Based on in-depth interviews with 53 Irish women collected at three British Pregnancy Advisory Services (BPAS) clinics in England we analyse women's experiences as they navigated an 'environment of secrecy' in Ireland. This included making specific secrecy efforts when navigating travel arrangements, conversations, movement, health records, and the travel itself. Despite the expansion of abortion access in Ireland in 2018, the need to travel abroad continues for many women. We argue that the continued need for secrecy when women have to travel abroad for care perpetuates this important phenomenon's invisibility. This argument also applies to other countries where abortion access is restricted, and women are forced to travel for care. We also caution against the presumption that all Irish residents are able to travel internationally for healthcare.

Travel for later abortion in the USA: lived experiences, structural contributors and abortion fund support.

As abortion restrictions expand in the USA, pregnant people will continue to experience delays and be forced to travel for abortion. The study aims to describe later abortion travel experiences, understand structural factors influencing travel, and identify strategies to improve travel. This qualitative phenomenological study analyses data from 19 interviews with people who travelled at least 25 miles for abortion after the first trimester. Framework analysis used a structural violence lens. More than two-thirds of participants travelled interstate, and half received abortion fund support. Key considerations of travel include logistics, challenges during the journey, and physical and emotional recovery during and after travel. Restrictive laws, financial insecurity and anti-abortion infrastructure are forms of structural violence that created challenges and delays. Reliance on abortion funds facilitated access but also entailed uncertainty. Better resourced abortion funds could organise travel in advance, facilitate the travel of accompanying escorts, and tailor emotional support to reduce stress for those travelling. Clinical and practical support systems must be prepared to support people travelling for abortion, as later abortion and forced travel is increasing since the constitutional right to abortion in the USA was overturned. Findings can inform interventions to support the increasing number of people travelling for abortion.

Abortion beyond 13 weeks in Argentina: healthcare seeking experiences during self-managed abortion accompanied by the Socorristas en Red.

BACKGROUND: In Argentina, a group of feminist activists, the Socorristas en Red, provide information and accompaniment to people seeking abortions, including beyond 13 weeks gestation. Recently-released WHO guidelines for abortion care acknowledge that abortion trajectories vary and people may seek services and support from a range of settings in the process of an abortion. It follows, therefore, that people who self manage abortions beyond 13 weeks with the support of accompaniment groups may interact with health professionals in the public and/or private sector. Understanding the reasons for and experiences with these interactions can help to inform best practice. METHODS: In 2016, we conducted 23 exploratory interviews among women who self managed abortions beyond 13 weeks gestation accompanied by Socorristas, to understand healthcare-seeking decisions and experiences. We used narrative inquiry as an interview technique and coded interviews using first a holistic coding and, second, a content analysis technique to identify emergent themes in the text and subsequently identify themes relevant to study aims. RESULTS: We found that many participants had disclosed their abortion intentions to health professionals prior to their abortions. Some were provided with emotional support and referrals to the Socorristas, while others were admonished and warned of serious health consequences. Most participants sought post-abortion care in public or private-sector health facilities; for fear of legal repercussions, many participants did not share that they had used abortion medications with post-abortion care providers. During care seeking, some participants reported poor treatment, in several cases because they were suspected of inducing abortion, while others reported supportive care from health professionals who had previously-established relationships with the Socorristas. CONCLUSIONS: This study illuminates the important role that supportive health professionals can play to ensure that, regardless of the trajectory of an abortion, people feel comfortable accessing clinical services during their abortion process, even in restrictive settings. Feminist activists can help build bridges with the medical system to ensure that providers who interact with people seeking abortion-related services are empathic, understand their legal rights, and provide supportive care.

Before 2021, Argentina's laws prohibited abortion except in limited circumstances. A feminist activist group, the Socorristas en Red, provided information and support to people seeking abortion services, including those beyond 13 weeks gestation. Recently-released WHO guidelines for abortion care acknowledge that abortion trajectories vary and people may seek services and support from a range of settings in the process of a single abortion (World Health Organization, 2022). It follows, therefore, that people who self manage abortions beyond 13 weeks with the support of accompaniment groups may interact with health professionals in the public and/or private sector. Understanding reasons for and experiences with these interactions can help improve quality of abortion care and inform best practice. We conducted interviews with people who used medications for abortion in the second trimester supported by the Socorristas and analyzed their stories about abortion-related healthcare. Participants in our study sought healthcare services in clinics at various timepoints: many visited providers when first considering abortion, and most went to providers for post-abortion care. Some providers admonished their patients for seeking abortion services, while others provided referrals to the Socorristas. Many participants were concerned about their legal safety, and feared prosecution when they received healthcare services, especially if seeking care after the abortion. In these instances, some participants experienced poor quality or inappropriate care because they did not feel safe sharing that they had taken medications for abortion, and others were treated poorly because of the abortion. The experiences of those who sought services from health professionals who had established relationships with the Socorristas appeared to be more positive than the others. This study illuminates the important role that supportive health professionals can play to ensure that, regardless of the trajectory of an abortion, people feel comfortable accessing clinical services during the course of an abortion, even in restrictive settings, and how feminist activists can help to ensure providers are empathic and provide supportive care to all those who have abortions.

What constitutes a good healthcare experience for unintended pregnancy? A qualitative study among young people in California.

Little is known about young people's experiences accessing healthcare for unintended pregnancy in the USA. To address this gap, we conducted in-depth interviews with 25 young people in California who had experienced at least one unintended pregnancy at or before 25 years of age. Participants were asked about their interactions with healthcare providers during the pregnancy, their thoughts on the determinants of their perceived quality of care, and the ways in which their healthcare experience could have been improved. Thematic analysis was used to organise information within and across interview transcripts. Two important determinants of participants' satisfaction with their healthcare experience were identified during analysis: (1) receiving comprehensive information about their pregnancy options and what to expect from each, and (2) having an empathetic, non-judgemental provider. Regarding abortion, participants described an unmet need for accurate information and frequent stigmatising experiences with dismissive and judgemental care providers. These findings highlight the importance of providing comprehensive, non-judgemental pregnancy options counselling to all pregnant people, regardless of age and desired pregnancy outcome; and reinforce the need for providers to consider ways in which their own bias may influence the quality of care they provide.

Understanding abortion seeking care outside of formal health care settings in Cape Town, South Africa: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Although abortion was legalized in South Africa in 1996, barriers to safe, legal abortion services remain, and women continue to seek abortions outside of the formal healthcare sector. This study explored the decision-making processes that women undertake when faced with an unintended pregnancy, the sources of information used to make their decisions and the factors that contribute to their seeking of informal sector abortion in Cape Town, South Africa. METHODS: We conducted 15 semi-structured in-depth interviews in English with women who had accessed an abortion outside of the formal health care sector. Women were recruited with the assistance of a community-based key informant. Data was analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Participants were aware that abortions were legal and accessible in public clinics, however they were concerned that others would find out about their unintended pregnancy and abortion if they went to legal providers. Women were also concerned about judgment and mistreatment from providers during their care. Rather than seek care in the formal sector, women looked past concerns around the safety and effectiveness of informal sector abortions and often relied on their social networks for referrals to informal providers. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the decision-making processes employed by women when seeking abortion services in a setting where abortion is legal and demonstrate the role of institutional and societal barriers to safe abortion access. Abortion service delivery models should adapt to women's needs to enhance the preferences and priorities of those seeking abortion care-including those who prefer facility-based care as well as those who might prefer self-managed medical abortions.

Although abortion was legalized in South Africa in 1996, barriers to safe, legal abortion services remain, and women continue to seek abortions outside of the formal healthcare sector. This study explored the decision-making processes that women undertake when faced with an unintended pregnancy, who they discuss and seek help from, and the factors that influence their decision to seek an abortion outside of the formal health care sector. We interviewed 15 women who had obtained an abortion outside of the health care sector in Cape Town, South Africa. Women were aware that abortions were legal and available in public clinics, but they were concerned about negative and judgmental attitudes from health care providers even though some women were aware of the possible health safety issues related to seeking an abortion outside of the clinic setting. Abortion services should adapt to women's needs and offer them options of facility-based care but also self-managed medical abortions under the guidance of health care providers.

Cross-country abortion travel to England and Wales: results from a cross-sectional survey exploring people's experiences crossing borders to obtain care.

BACKGROUND: The laws governing abortion access vary across Europe. Even in countries with relatively liberal laws, numerous barriers to abortion access exist. In response to these barriers, evidence suggests that people living in countries with both restrictive and liberal laws travel outside of their home country for abortion care. England and Wales are common destinations for those who travel to seek abortions, but little is known about the motivations and experiences of those who undertake cross-country travel to England or Wales to obtain care. This paper aims to describe the abortion seeking and travel experiences of women and pregnant people who traveled to England and Wales for an abortion between 2017 and 2019. METHODS: We recruited 97 participants who had traveled cross-country from both liberal and restrictive contexts to seek abortion care at three participating BPAS clinics in England and Wales. Participants completed an electronic survey about their reproductive histories, abortion decision-making, experiences seeking abortion care, and traveling. We conducted a descriptive analysis, and include comparisons between participants who traveled from liberal and restrictive contexts. RESULTS: Over a third of participants considered abortion four weeks or more before presenting for care at BPAS, and around two-thirds sought abortion services in their home country before traveling. The majority of participants indicated that they would have preferred to have obtained an abortion earlier and cited reasons including scheduling issues, a dearth of local services, delayed pregnancy recognition, and financial difficulties as causing their delay. About seventy percent of participants reported travel costs between €101-1000 and 75% of participants reported that the cost of the abortion procedure exceeded €500. About half of participants indicated that, overall, their travel was very or somewhat difficult. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis documents the burdens associated with cross-country travel for abortion and provides insight into the factors that compel people to travel. Our findings highlight the need for expanded access to abortion care throughout Europe via the removal of legal impediments and other social or procedural barriers. Removing barriers would eliminate the need for cumbersome abortion travel, and ensure that all people can obtain necessary, high-quality healthcare in their own communities.

In Europe, people who live in countries where abortion is severely restricted or illegal altogether lack access to abortion care entirely, but even people who live in countries with more liberal laws face barriers due to gestational age limits, waiting periods, and a lack of trained and willing providers. Existing evidence suggests that restrictions and barriers compel people from both countries with restrictive laws as well as those from countries with more liberal laws to travel outside of their home country for abortion services. England and Wales are common destinations for people traveling within Europe to obtain abortion services, but little is known about the experiences of these travelers. We surveyed individuals who had traveled from another country to seek abortion services in England or Wales. Our analysis documents that many participants contemplated getting an abortion and sought care in their home countries before traveling. Likewise, many participants indicated that they would have preferred to have obtained an abortion earlier in their pregnancy, and referenced scheduling issues, a dearth of local services, delayed pregnancy recognition, and financial difficulties as causing their delay. A majority of participants indicated that covering the costs of their abortion, and the costs of travel was difficult, and that the travel experience in its entirety was difficult. Our findings document the reasons for, and burdens associated with abortion travel and highlight the need to expand access to abortion across Europe via the elimination of all legal restrictions and impediments.

Self-managed medication abortion outcomes: results from a prospective pilot study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a prospective study to measure self-managed medication abortion outcomes, and to collect preliminary data on safety and effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion, we recruited callers to accompaniment groups (volunteer networks that provide counselling through the out-of-clinic medication abortion process by trained counselors over the phone or in-person). METHODS: In 2019, we enrolled callers to three abortion accompaniment groups in three countries into a prospective study on the safety and effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion with accompaniment support. Participants completed up to five interview-administered questionnaires from baseline through 6-weeks after taking the pills. Primary outcomes included: (1) the number of participants enrolled in a 30-day period, (2) the proportion that had a complete abortion; and (3) the proportion who experienced any warning signs of potential or actual complications. RESULTS: Over the 30-day recruitment period, we enrolled 227 participants (95% of those invited), and retained 204 participants (90%) for at least one study follow-up visit. At the 1-week follow-up, two participants (1%) reported a miscarriage prior to taking the pills, and 202 participants (89% of those enrolled and 99% of those who participated in the 1-week survey) had obtained and taken the medications. Three weeks after taking the medications, 192 (95%) participants reported feeling that their abortion was complete. Three (1.5%) received a surgical intervention, two (1%) received antibiotics, and five (3%) received other medications. Participants did not report any major adverse events. CONCLUSION: These results establish the feasibility of conducting prospective studies of self-managed medication abortion in legally restrictive settings. Further, the high effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion with accompaniment support reported here is consistent with high levels of effectiveness reported in prior studies. Trial registration ISRCTN95769543.

Reducing underreporting of stigmatized pregnancy outcomes: results from a mixed-methods study of self-managed abortion in Texas using the list-experiment method.

BACKGROUND: Accurately measuring stigmatized experiences is a challenge across reproductive health research. In this study, we tested a novel method - the list experiment - that aims to reduce underreporting of sensitive events by asking participants to report how many of a list of experiences they have had, not which ones. We applied the list experiment to measure "self-managed abortion" - any attempt by a person to end a pregnancy on one's own, outside of a clinical setting - a phenomenon that may be underreported in surveys due to a desire to avoid judgement. METHODS: We administered a double list experiment on self-managed abortion to a Texas-wide representative sample of 790 women of reproductive age in 2015. Participants were asked how many of a list of health experiences they had experienced; self-managed abortion was randomly added as an item to half of the lists. A difference in the average number of items reported by participants between lists with and without self-managed abortion provided a population level estimate of self-managed abortion. In 2017, we conducted cognitive interviews with women of reproductive age in four states to understand how women (1) interpreted the list experiment question format, and (2) interpreted the list item on prior experiences attempting to self-manage an abortion. RESULTS: Results from this list experiment estimated that 8% of women of reproductive age in Texas have ever self-managed an abortion. This number was higher than expected, thus, the researchers conducted cognitive interviews to better understand how people interpreted the list experiment on self-managed abortion. Some women interpreted "on your own" to mean "without the knowledge of friends or family", as opposed to "without medical assistance", as intended. CONCLUSION: The list experiment may have reduced under-reporting of self-managed abortion; however, the specific phrasing of the list item may also have unintentionally increased reporting of abortion experiences not considered "self-managed." High participation in and comprehension of the list experiment, however, suggests that this method is worthy of further exploration as tool for measuring stigmatized experiences.

Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010-14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model.

BACKGROUND: Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increasingly widespread use of misoprostol outside formal health systems in contexts where abortion is legally restricted, and the need to account for the multiple factors that affect abortion safety. METHODS: We used all available empirical data on abortion methods, providers, and settings, and factors affecting safety as covariates within a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the global, regional, and subregional distributions of abortion by safety categories. We used a three-tiered categorisation based on the WHO definition of unsafe abortion and WHO guidelines on safe abortion to categorise abortions as safe or unsafe and to further divide unsafe abortions into two categories of less safe and least safe. FINDINGS: Of the 55·â€ˆ7 million abortions that occurred worldwide each year between 2010-14, we estimated that 30·6 million (54·9%, 90% uncertainty interval 49·9-59·4) were safe, 17·1 million (30·7%, 25·5-35·6) were less safe, and 8·0 million (14·4%, 11·5-18·1) were least safe. Thus, 25·1 million (45·1%, 40·6-50·1) abortions each year between 2010 and 2014 were unsafe, with 24·3 million (97%) of these in developing countries. The proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in developing countries than developed countries (49·5% vs 12·5%). When grouped by the legal status of abortion, the proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in those with less restrictive laws. INTERPRETATION: Increased efforts are needed, especially in developing countries, to ensure access to safe abortion. The paucity of empirical data is a limitation of these findings. Improved in-country data for health services and innovative research to address these gaps are needed to improve future estimates. FUNDING: UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; UK Aid from the UK Government; Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Socioeconomic Outcomes of Women Who Receive and Women Who Are Denied Wanted Abortions in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the socioeconomic consequences of receipt versus denial of abortion. METHODS: Women who presented for abortion just before or after the gestational age limit of 30 abortion facilities across the United States between 2008 and 2010 were recruited and followed for 5 years via semiannual telephone interviews. Using mixed effects models, we evaluated socioeconomic outcomes for 813 women by receipt or denial of abortion care. RESULTS: In analyses that adjusted for the few baseline differences, women denied abortions who gave birth had higher odds of poverty 6 months after denial (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 3.77; P < .001) than did women who received abortions; women denied abortions were also more likely to be in poverty for 4 years after denial of abortion. Six months after denial of abortion, women were less likely to be employed full time (AOR = 0.37; P = .001) and were more likely to receive public assistance (AOR = 6.26; P < .001) than were women who obtained abortions, differences that remained significant for 4 years. CONCLUSIONS: Women denied an abortion were more likely than were women who received an abortion to experience economic hardship and insecurity lasting years. Laws that restrict access to abortion may result in worsened economic outcomes for women.

Dualities between Tunisian provider beliefs and actions in abortion care.

Despite Tunisia's historically progressive reproductive health policies, Tunisian women now face significant challenges accessing legal abortion. Through in-depth interviews with providers at six facilities, we explored factors influencing provider attitudes about abortion and provider perspectives about abortion morality, safety, and legality. We found that gatekeepers (counsellors and front office staff) generally believed abortion was immoral, while obstetricians and gynecologists were more likely to support an individual's right to access abortion. However, providers' actions do not necessarily align with their stated beliefs regarding abortion; some providers who said they support abortion access generally held personal beliefs about when and for whom abortion is appropriate which influenced their provision of care. System-level barriers to abortion provision, such as a lack of resources, hinder some providers who may otherwise be willing to provide the service. These system-level barriers may also account for inconsistencies between providers' beliefs and actions related to abortion. Illuminating the complexity in provider beliefs and attitudes about abortion can help us to better understand whether and why abortion care is provided, as well as the factors that ultimately determine whether a woman can obtain an abortion.

Abortion incidence between 1990 and 2014: global, regional, and subregional levels and trends.

BACKGROUND: Information about the incidence of induced abortion is needed to motivate and inform efforts to help women avoid unintended pregnancies and to monitor progress toward that end. We estimate subregional, regional, and global levels and trends in abortion incidence for 1990 to 2014, and abortion rates in subgroups of women. We use the results to estimate the proportion of pregnancies that end in abortion and examine whether abortion rates vary in countries grouped by the legal status of abortion. METHODS: We requested abortion data from government agencies and compiled data from international sources and nationally representative studies. With data for 1069 country-years, we estimated incidence using a Bayesian hierarchical time series model whereby the overall abortion rate is a function of the modelled rates in subgroups of women of reproductive age defined by their marital status and contraceptive need and use, and the sizes of these subgroups. FINDINGS: We estimated that 35 abortions (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 33 to 44) occurred annually per 1000 women aged 15-44 years worldwide in 2010-14, which was 5 points less than 40 (39-48) in 1990-94 (90% UI for decline -11 to 0). Because of population growth, the annual number of abortions worldwide increased by 5.9 million (90% UI -1.3 to 15.4), from 50.4 million in 1990-94 (48.6 to 59.9) to 56.3 million (52.4 to 70.0) in 2010-14. In the developed world, the abortion rate declined 19 points (-26 to -14), from 46 (41 to 59) to 27 (24 to 37). In the developing world, we found a non-significant 2 point decline (90% UI -9 to 4) in the rate from 39 (37 to 47) to 37 (34 to 46). Some 25% (90% UI 23 to 29) of pregnancies ended in abortion in 2010-14. Globally, 73% (90% UI 59 to 82) of abortions were obtained by married women in 2010-14 compared with 27% (18 to 41) obtained by unmarried women. We did not observe an association between the abortion rates for 2010-14 and the grounds under which abortion is legally allowed. INTERPRETATION: Abortion rates have declined significantly since 1990 in the developed world but not in the developing world. Ensuring access to sexual and reproductive health care could help millions of women avoid unintended pregnancies and ensure access to safe abortion. FUNDING: UK Government, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction.

Multivariable regression analysis of list experiment data on abortion: results from a large, randomly-selected population based study in Liberia.

BACKGROUND: The list experiment is a promising measurement tool for eliciting truthful responses to stigmatized or sensitive health behaviors. However, investigators may be hesitant to adopt the method due to previously untestable assumptions and the perceived inability to conduct multivariable analysis. With a recently developed statistical test that can detect the presence of a design effect - the absence of which is a central assumption of the list experiment method - we sought to test the validity of a list experiment conducted on self-reported abortion in Liberia. We also aim to introduce recently developed multivariable regression estimators for the analysis of list experiment data, to explore relationships between respondent characteristics and having had an abortion - an important component of understanding the experiences of women who have abortions. METHODS: To test the null hypothesis of no design effect in the Liberian list experiment data, we calculated the percentage of each respondent "type," characterized by response to the control items, and compared these percentages across treatment and control groups with a Bonferroni-adjusted alpha criterion. We then implemented two least squares and two maximum likelihood models (four total), each representing different bias-variance trade-offs, to estimate the association between respondent characteristics and abortion. RESULTS: We find no clear evidence of a design effect in list experiment data from Liberia (p = 0.18), affirming the first key assumption of the method. Multivariable analyses suggest a negative association between education and history of abortion. The retrospective nature of measuring lifetime experience of abortion, however, complicates interpretation of results, as the timing and safety of a respondent's abortion may have influenced her ability to pursue an education. CONCLUSION: Our work demonstrates that multivariable analyses, as well as statistical testing of a key design assumption, are possible with list experiment data, although with important limitations when considering lifetime measures. We outline how to implement this methodology with list experiment data in future research.

The List Experiment for Measuring Abortion: What We Know and What We Need.

Measuring abortion incidence and prevalence is often difficult because of under-reporting and other biases, complicated research designs, and other issues. Recently, family planning researchers have introduced a new method called the list experiment, adopted from political science and economics, to measure abortion. Three completed studies and at least four studies currently underway use this method to measure abortion in several countries. We discuss the lessons learned from completed studies, when the list experiment may and may not be appropriate, and open questions regarding the use of the list experiment for abortion research. This method has the potential to improve measures of abortion prevalence and incidence, which could translate to better-informed interventions to increase abortion access and reduce unmet need for family planning. Future research should further clarify the advantages and limitations of the list experiment for measuring abortion.

Women's experiences seeking informal sector abortion services in Cape Town, South Africa: a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: In settings where abortion is legally restricted, or permitted but not widely accessible, women face significant barriers to abortion access, sometimes leading them to seek services outside legal facilities. The advent of medication abortion has further increased the prevalence of informal sector abortion. This study investigates the reasons for attempting self-induction, methods used, complications, and sources of information about informal sector abortion, and tests a specific recruitment method which could lead to improved estimates of informal sector abortion prevalence among an at-risk population. METHODS: We recruited women who have sought informal sector abortion services in Cape Town, South Africa using respondent driven sampling (RDS). An initial seed recruiter was responsible for initiating recruitment using a structured coupon system. Participants completed face-to-face questionnaires, which included information about demographics, informal sector abortion seeking, and safe abortion access needs. RESULTS: We enrolled 42 women, nearly one-third of whom reported they were sex workers. Thirty-four women (81%) reported having had one informal sector abortion within the past 5 years, 14% reported having had two, and 5% reported having had three. These women consumed home remedies, herbal mixtures from traditional healers, or tablets from an unregistered provider. Twelve sought additional care for potential warning signs of complications. Privacy and fear of mistreatment at public sector facilities were among the main reported reasons for attempting informal sector abortion. Most women (67%) cited other community members as their source of information about informal sector abortion; posted signs and fliers in public spaces also served as an important source of information. CONCLUSIONS: Women are attempting informal sector abortion because they seek privacy and fear mistreatment and stigma in health facilities. Some were unaware how or where to seek formal sector services, or believed the cost was too high. Many informal methods are ineffective and unsafe, leading to potential warning signs of complications and continued pregnancy. Sex workers may be at particular risk of unsafe abortion. Based on these results, it is essential that future studies sample women outside of the formal health sector. The use of innovative sampling methods would greatly improve our knowledge about informal sector abortion in South Africa.

'I felt the world crash down on me': Women's experiences being denied legal abortion in Colombia.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, Colombia's constitutional court overturned a complete ban on abortion, liberalizing the procedure. Despite a relatively liberal new law, women still struggle to access safe and legal abortion services. We aimed to understand why women are denied services in Colombia, and what factors determine if and how they ultimately terminate pregnancies. METHODS: We recruited women denied abortion at a private facility in Bogota. Twenty-one participants completed an initial interview and eight completed a second longer interview. Two researchers documented themes and developed and applied a codebook to transcripts using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: Participants faced barriers, such as lack of knowledge of service availability and delayed pregnancy recognition, leading to denial. Five out of eight participants ultimately received abortions in public hospitals, due to support from partners and a robust referral system; nevertheless, they received poor care. Those who continued pregnancies endured stigmatizing events and inaccurate medical counselling at referral facilities. Several women contemplated illegal abortion though were afraid to attempt it. CONCLUSION: We propose the following recommendations: 1) increase awareness about availability and legality of abortion services to prevent delay and consequent denial; 2) provide counseling and referral upon denial; and 3) train providers in interpersonal quality abortion care.