FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2941606032> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2941606032 endingPage "1103" @default.
• W2941606032 startingPage "1103" @default.
• W2941606032 abstract "The systematic review by Endler et al. (BJOG 2019;126:1094-102), provides reassuring evidence from a range of settings that telemedicine provision of medical abortion is safe, effective, and well-liked by patients and providers. Clinical outcomes were found to be similar to those for models of care that involved an in-person visit. The authors note that surgical evacuation rates for telemedicine patients were higher than those reported for services with in-person visits. However, these higher rates were driven by studies in settings where abortion is legally restricted, and patients may be cared for by clinicians with limited experience with medical abortion. One outcome that was not assessed in this systematic review is how telemedicine for medical abortion improves access to care. In settings where abortion is legally restricted and availability of safe abortion services may be very limited, if available at all, high-quality telemedicine services undoubtedly improve access. But even in settings where abortion is legal and safe, telemedicine appears to improve access. In an analysis of data from Iowa (USA), the introduction of telemedicine services providing medical abortion was associated with a reduction in second-trimester abortion and increased likelihood of obtaining the service for women living in areas more distant from clinics providing in-person care (Grossman et al. Am J Public Health 2013;103:73–8). The review also highlights some of the challenges with performing abortion research, particularly in settings where the service is legally restricted. Studies in these settings included in the review lacked a control group, as in-person abortion care in these countries was generally prohibited. Loss to follow-up was also high in several of these studies. Where there is a chance that women may face legal risks from accessing abortion care, they may be reticent to participate in follow-up surveys sent by email or telephone. The fact that all of the studies in the review performed in multiple settings have similar findings is reassuring despite these limitations. The findings from this systematic review should be used to inform policy and remove barriers to expanding medical abortion telemedicine services. In the USA, despite evidence documenting the safety and effectiveness of the service (Grossman et al. Obstet Gynecol 2011;118,2 Pt 1:296–303; Grossman et al. Obstet Gynecol 2017;130:778–82), 17 states have banned the use of telemedicine to provide abortion care, and many of these are the same states with limited access to clinic-based services. The US Food and Drug Administration requires that mifepristone be dispensed in a clinic, doctor's office or hospital, despite the lack of evidence supporting the need for this restriction (Mifeprex REMS Study Group et al. N Engl J Med 2017;376:790–4). This restriction has been interpreted to prohibit the mailing of mifepristone, which has limited the expansion of direct-to-patient models of telemedicine such as those described in the review in Australia and Canada and those provided by Women on Web. These restrictions are not evidence-based and limit access to care. Telemedicine is being used in many areas of medicine – from connecting specialists to primary care providers to reaching patients directly in their homes with a variety of healthcare services. Medical abortion is just one more use for this technology, and the review by Endler and colleagues demonstrates how appropriate this service is for telemedicine. Dr Grossman reports personal fees from Planned Parenthood Federation of America, outside the submitted work. A completed disclosure of interests form is available to view online as supporting information. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article." @default.
• W2941606032 created "2019-05-03" @default.
• W2941606032 creator A5090267592 @default.
• W2941606032 date "2019-05-11" @default.
• W2941606032 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2941606032 title "Telemedicine for medical abortion – time to move towards broad implementation" @default.
• W2941606032 doi "https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.15802" @default.
• W2941606032 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31009164" @default.
• W2941606032 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2941606032 type Work @default.
• W2941606032 sameAs 2941606032 @default.
• W2941606032 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W2941606032 countsByYear W29416060322021 @default.
• W2941606032 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2941606032 hasAuthorship W2941606032A5090267592 @default.
• W2941606032 hasBestOaLocation W29416060321 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2778079182 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2778642596 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2779076696 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2779199973 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2779560327 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2779891985 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C2986817661 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C545542383 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C159110408 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C160735492 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C17744445 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C199539241 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2778079182 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2778642596 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2779076696 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2779199973 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2779234561 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2779560327 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2779891985 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2908647359 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C2986817661 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C512399662 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C54355233 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C545542383 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C71924100 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C86803240 @default.
• W2941606032 hasConceptScore W2941606032C99454951 @default.
• W2941606032 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W2941606032 hasLocation W29416060321 @default.
• W2941606032 hasLocation W29416060322 @default.
• W2941606032 hasOpenAccess W2941606032 @default.
• W2941606032 hasPrimaryLocation W29416060321 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W1976042523 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W1984811432 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W1995468166 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W2004178633 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W2135229421 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W2899816896 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W3016105397 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W3126067857 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W4233088747 @default.
• W2941606032 hasRelatedWork W2786769035 @default.
• W2941606032 hasVolume "126" @default.
• W2941606032 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2941606032 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2941606032 magId "2941606032" @default.
• W2941606032 workType "article" @default.