{"title":"恢复、保护和扩大美国的堕胎机会:通过德尔菲法寻求共识","authors":"S Pickering, M Manze, JV Lazarus, D Romero","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The <em>Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization</em> decision exacerbated inequitable access to abortion in the US. Agreement is needed on which strategies should be prioritized to restore, protect, and expand abortion access.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We convened a multidisciplinary, geographically diverse Delphi panel of clinical, research, policy, legal, and advocacy experts to reach consensus (ie, agreement <u>></u>67%) on recommended actions. Using feedback from three rounds of surveys, and input from a select expert advisory group (n=10), we iteratively refined the consensus points.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The panel (n=85) developed 25 consensus statements and 32 recommendations for action in states with protected, mixed, or restricted access to abortion based on categorizations by the Guttmacher Institute. In states with <em>protected</em> access, key recommendations (ie, >70% agreement) were to incorporate abortion into primary care and expand clinical services to include all types of abortion. In states with <em>mixed access</em>, key recommendations were to establish pathways for patients seeking abortion, lobby for Medicaid coverage of abortion, expand clinical services to include all types of abortion, and build broad coalitions for abortion access. In states with <em>restricted</em> access to abortion, the key recommendations were to combat gerrymandering and voter suppression, train emergency room staff in abortion care, establish protections against criminalization, and flip state legislatures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This Delphi study identified actionable priorities in addressing inequitable access to abortion in states with varied policy environments. It also highlights areas where more strategic discussions are needed (eg, the utility of boycotts in states with abortion bans).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"RESTORING, PROTECTING, AND EXPANDING ABORTION ACCESS IN THE US: SEEKING CONSENSUS THROUGH THE DELPHI METHOD\",\"authors\":\"S Pickering, M Manze, JV Lazarus, D Romero\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110586\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The <em>Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization</em> decision exacerbated inequitable access to abortion in the US. Agreement is needed on which strategies should be prioritized to restore, protect, and expand abortion access.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We convened a multidisciplinary, geographically diverse Delphi panel of clinical, research, policy, legal, and advocacy experts to reach consensus (ie, agreement <u>></u>67%) on recommended actions. Using feedback from three rounds of surveys, and input from a select expert advisory group (n=10), we iteratively refined the consensus points.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The panel (n=85) developed 25 consensus statements and 32 recommendations for action in states with protected, mixed, or restricted access to abortion based on categorizations by the Guttmacher Institute. In states with <em>protected</em> access, key recommendations (ie, >70% agreement) were to incorporate abortion into primary care and expand clinical services to include all types of abortion. In states with <em>mixed access</em>, key recommendations were to establish pathways for patients seeking abortion, lobby for Medicaid coverage of abortion, expand clinical services to include all types of abortion, and build broad coalitions for abortion access. In states with <em>restricted</em> access to abortion, the key recommendations were to combat gerrymandering and voter suppression, train emergency room staff in abortion care, establish protections against criminalization, and flip state legislatures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This Delphi study identified actionable priorities in addressing inequitable access to abortion in states with varied policy environments. It also highlights areas where more strategic discussions are needed (eg, the utility of boycotts in states with abortion bans).</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424002816\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782424002816","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
RESTORING, PROTECTING, AND EXPANDING ABORTION ACCESS IN THE US: SEEKING CONSENSUS THROUGH THE DELPHI METHOD
Objectives
The Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision exacerbated inequitable access to abortion in the US. Agreement is needed on which strategies should be prioritized to restore, protect, and expand abortion access.
Methods
We convened a multidisciplinary, geographically diverse Delphi panel of clinical, research, policy, legal, and advocacy experts to reach consensus (ie, agreement >67%) on recommended actions. Using feedback from three rounds of surveys, and input from a select expert advisory group (n=10), we iteratively refined the consensus points.
Results
The panel (n=85) developed 25 consensus statements and 32 recommendations for action in states with protected, mixed, or restricted access to abortion based on categorizations by the Guttmacher Institute. In states with protected access, key recommendations (ie, >70% agreement) were to incorporate abortion into primary care and expand clinical services to include all types of abortion. In states with mixed access, key recommendations were to establish pathways for patients seeking abortion, lobby for Medicaid coverage of abortion, expand clinical services to include all types of abortion, and build broad coalitions for abortion access. In states with restricted access to abortion, the key recommendations were to combat gerrymandering and voter suppression, train emergency room staff in abortion care, establish protections against criminalization, and flip state legislatures.
Conclusions
This Delphi study identified actionable priorities in addressing inequitable access to abortion in states with varied policy environments. It also highlights areas where more strategic discussions are needed (eg, the utility of boycotts in states with abortion bans).
期刊介绍:
Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.