Changes in Reproductive Health Information-Seeking Behaviors After the Dobbs Decision: Systematic Search of the Wikimedia Database.

IF 3.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
JMIR infodemiology Pub Date : 2024-12-16 DOI:10.2196/64577
Mackenzie Lemieux, Cyrus Zhou, Caroline Cary, Jeannie Kelly
{"title":"Changes in Reproductive Health Information-Seeking Behaviors After the Dobbs Decision: Systematic Search of the Wikimedia Database.","authors":"Mackenzie Lemieux, Cyrus Zhou, Caroline Cary, Jeannie Kelly","doi":"10.2196/64577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>After the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, confusion followed regarding the legality of abortion in different states across the country. Recent studies found increased Google searches for abortion-related terms in restricted states after the Dobbsv. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision was leaked. As patients and providers use Wikipedia (Wikimedia Foundation) as a predominant medical information source, we hypothesized that changes in reproductive health information-seeking behavior could be better understood by examining Wikipedia article traffic.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to examine trends in Wikipedia usage for abortion and contraception information before and after the Dobbs decision.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Page views of abortion- and contraception-related Wikipedia pages were scraped. Temporal changes in page views before and after the Dobbs decision were then analyzed to explore changes in baseline views, differences in views for abortion-related information in states with restrictive abortion laws versus nonrestrictive states, and viewer trends on contraception-related pages.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Wikipedia articles related to abortion topics had significantly increased page views following the leaked and final Dobbs decision. There was a 103-fold increase in the page views for the Wikipedia article Roe v. Wade following the Dobbs decision leak (mean 372,654, SD 135,478 vs mean 3614, SD 248; P<.001) and a 67-fold increase in page views following the release of the final Dobbs decision (mean 8942, SD 402 vs mean 595,871, SD 178,649; P<.001). Articles about abortion in the most restrictive states had a greater increase in page views (mean 40.6, SD 12.7; 18/51, 35% states) than articles about abortion in states with some restrictions or protections (mean 26.8, SD 7.3; 24/51, 47% states; P<.001) and in the most protective states (mean 20.6, SD 5.7; 8/51, 16% states; P<.001). Finally, views to pages about common contraceptive methods significantly increased after the Dobbs decision. \"Vasectomy\" page views increased by 183% (P<.001), \"IUD\" (intrauterine device) page views increased by 80% (P<.001), \"Combined oral contraceptive pill\" page views increased by 24% (P<.001), \"Emergency Contraception\" page views increased by 224% (P<.001), and \"Tubal ligation\" page views increased by 92% (P<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>People sought information on Wikipedia about abortion and contraception at increased rates after the Dobbs decision. Increased traffic to abortion-related Wikipedia articles correlated to the restrictiveness of state abortion policies. Increased interest in contraception-related pages reflects the increased demand for contraceptives observed after the Dobbs decision. Our work positions Wikipedia as an important source of reproductive health information and demands increased attention to maintain and improve Wikipedia as a reliable source of health information after the Dobbs decision.</p>","PeriodicalId":73554,"journal":{"name":"JMIR infodemiology","volume":"4 ","pages":"e64577"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11686025/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR infodemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/64577","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: After the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, confusion followed regarding the legality of abortion in different states across the country. Recent studies found increased Google searches for abortion-related terms in restricted states after the Dobbsv. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision was leaked. As patients and providers use Wikipedia (Wikimedia Foundation) as a predominant medical information source, we hypothesized that changes in reproductive health information-seeking behavior could be better understood by examining Wikipedia article traffic.

Objective: This study aimed to examine trends in Wikipedia usage for abortion and contraception information before and after the Dobbs decision.

Methods: Page views of abortion- and contraception-related Wikipedia pages were scraped. Temporal changes in page views before and after the Dobbs decision were then analyzed to explore changes in baseline views, differences in views for abortion-related information in states with restrictive abortion laws versus nonrestrictive states, and viewer trends on contraception-related pages.

Results: Wikipedia articles related to abortion topics had significantly increased page views following the leaked and final Dobbs decision. There was a 103-fold increase in the page views for the Wikipedia article Roe v. Wade following the Dobbs decision leak (mean 372,654, SD 135,478 vs mean 3614, SD 248; P<.001) and a 67-fold increase in page views following the release of the final Dobbs decision (mean 8942, SD 402 vs mean 595,871, SD 178,649; P<.001). Articles about abortion in the most restrictive states had a greater increase in page views (mean 40.6, SD 12.7; 18/51, 35% states) than articles about abortion in states with some restrictions or protections (mean 26.8, SD 7.3; 24/51, 47% states; P<.001) and in the most protective states (mean 20.6, SD 5.7; 8/51, 16% states; P<.001). Finally, views to pages about common contraceptive methods significantly increased after the Dobbs decision. "Vasectomy" page views increased by 183% (P<.001), "IUD" (intrauterine device) page views increased by 80% (P<.001), "Combined oral contraceptive pill" page views increased by 24% (P<.001), "Emergency Contraception" page views increased by 224% (P<.001), and "Tubal ligation" page views increased by 92% (P<.001).

Conclusions: People sought information on Wikipedia about abortion and contraception at increased rates after the Dobbs decision. Increased traffic to abortion-related Wikipedia articles correlated to the restrictiveness of state abortion policies. Increased interest in contraception-related pages reflects the increased demand for contraceptives observed after the Dobbs decision. Our work positions Wikipedia as an important source of reproductive health information and demands increased attention to maintain and improve Wikipedia as a reliable source of health information after the Dobbs decision.

多布斯决策后生殖健康信息寻求行为的变化:维基媒体数据库的系统搜索。
背景:在美国最高法院推翻罗伊诉韦德案后,全国不同州对堕胎合法性的困惑随之而来。最近的研究发现,在多布斯夫之后,在限制堕胎的州,堕胎相关术语的搜索量增加了100万。杰克逊妇女健康组织的决定被泄露了。由于患者和提供者使用维基百科(维基媒体基金会)作为主要的医疗信息来源,我们假设通过检查维基百科文章流量可以更好地理解生殖健康信息寻求行为的变化。目的:本研究旨在研究在多布斯判决前后,维基百科对堕胎和避孕信息的使用趋势。方法:抓取与堕胎和避孕相关的维基百科页面的页面浏览量。然后分析了多布斯判决前后页面浏览量的时间变化,以探索基线浏览量的变化,堕胎相关信息在有限制性堕胎法的州与无限制性堕胎法的州的浏览量差异,以及观看者在避孕相关页面上的趋势。结果:维基百科上有关堕胎话题的文章在多布斯的最终决定被泄露后浏览量显著增加。在Dobbs判决泄露后,维基百科文章Roe v. Wade的页面浏览量增加了103倍(平均372,654,SD 135,478 vs平均3614,SD 248;结论:在多布斯案判决后,人们在维基百科上搜索有关堕胎和避孕的信息的比例增加了。与堕胎相关的维基百科文章的流量增加与各州堕胎政策的限制有关。人们对避孕相关网页的兴趣增加反映了在多布斯案判决后人们对避孕用品的需求增加。我们的工作将维基百科定位为生殖健康信息的重要来源,并要求在多布斯决定之后增加对维基百科作为健康信息可靠来源的维护和改进的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信