美国的堕胎禁令与生育率。

Q1 Medicine
Suzanne O Bell, Alexander M Franks, David Arbour, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Elizabeth A Stuart, Eli Ben-Michael, Avi Feller, Alison Gemmill
{"title":"美国的堕胎禁令与生育率。","authors":"Suzanne O Bell, Alexander M Franks, David Arbour, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Elizabeth A Stuart, Eli Ben-Michael, Avi Feller, Alison Gemmill","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.28527","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Abortion bans may lead to births among those who are unable to overcome barriers to abortion. The population-level effects of these policies, particularly their unequal impacts across subpopulations in the US, remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess heterogeneity in the association of abortion bans with changes in fertility in the US, within and across states.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Drawing from birth certificate and US Census Bureau data from 2012 through 2023 for all 50 states and the District of Columbia, this study used a bayesian panel data model to evaluate state-by-subgroup-specific changes in fertility associated with complete or 6-week abortion bans in 14 US states. The average percent and absolute change in the fertility rate among females aged 15 through 44 years was estimated overall and by state, and within and across states by age, race and ethnicity, marital status, education, and insurance payer.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Complete or 6-week abortion ban.</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measures: </strong>Fertility rate (births per 1000 reproductive-aged females) overall and by subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were an estimated 1.01 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.45-1.64) additional births above expectation per 1000 females aged 15 through 44 years (reproductive age) in states following adoption of abortion bans (60.55 observed vs 59.54 expected; 1.70% increase; 95% CrI, 0.75%-2.78%), equivalent to 22 180 excess births, with evidence of variation by state and subgroup. Estimated differences above expectation were largest for racially minoritized individuals (≈2.0%), unmarried individuals (1.79%), individuals younger than 35 years (≈2.0%), Medicaid beneficiaries (2.41%), and those without college degrees (high school diploma, 2.36%; some college, 1.58%), particularly in southern states. Differences in race and ethnicity and education across states explain most of the variability in the state-level association between abortion bans and fertility rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>These findings provide evidence that fertility rates in states with abortion bans were higher than would have been expected in the absence of these policies, with the largest estimated differences among subpopulations experiencing the greatest structural disadvantages and in states with among the worst maternal and child health and well-being outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":17196,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11826436/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"US Abortion Bans and Fertility.\",\"authors\":\"Suzanne O Bell, Alexander M Franks, David Arbour, Selena Anjur-Dietrich, Elizabeth A Stuart, Eli Ben-Michael, Avi Feller, Alison Gemmill\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jama.2024.28527\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Abortion bans may lead to births among those who are unable to overcome barriers to abortion. The population-level effects of these policies, particularly their unequal impacts across subpopulations in the US, remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess heterogeneity in the association of abortion bans with changes in fertility in the US, within and across states.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>Drawing from birth certificate and US Census Bureau data from 2012 through 2023 for all 50 states and the District of Columbia, this study used a bayesian panel data model to evaluate state-by-subgroup-specific changes in fertility associated with complete or 6-week abortion bans in 14 US states. The average percent and absolute change in the fertility rate among females aged 15 through 44 years was estimated overall and by state, and within and across states by age, race and ethnicity, marital status, education, and insurance payer.</p><p><strong>Exposure: </strong>Complete or 6-week abortion ban.</p><p><strong>Main outcome and measures: </strong>Fertility rate (births per 1000 reproductive-aged females) overall and by subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were an estimated 1.01 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.45-1.64) additional births above expectation per 1000 females aged 15 through 44 years (reproductive age) in states following adoption of abortion bans (60.55 observed vs 59.54 expected; 1.70% increase; 95% CrI, 0.75%-2.78%), equivalent to 22 180 excess births, with evidence of variation by state and subgroup. Estimated differences above expectation were largest for racially minoritized individuals (≈2.0%), unmarried individuals (1.79%), individuals younger than 35 years (≈2.0%), Medicaid beneficiaries (2.41%), and those without college degrees (high school diploma, 2.36%; some college, 1.58%), particularly in southern states. Differences in race and ethnicity and education across states explain most of the variability in the state-level association between abortion bans and fertility rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and relevance: </strong>These findings provide evidence that fertility rates in states with abortion bans were higher than would have been expected in the absence of these policies, with the largest estimated differences among subpopulations experiencing the greatest structural disadvantages and in states with among the worst maternal and child health and well-being outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17196,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Medical Association\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11826436/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.28527\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.28527","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
US Abortion Bans and Fertility.

Importance: Abortion bans may lead to births among those who are unable to overcome barriers to abortion. The population-level effects of these policies, particularly their unequal impacts across subpopulations in the US, remain unclear.

Objective: To assess heterogeneity in the association of abortion bans with changes in fertility in the US, within and across states.

Design, setting, and participants: Drawing from birth certificate and US Census Bureau data from 2012 through 2023 for all 50 states and the District of Columbia, this study used a bayesian panel data model to evaluate state-by-subgroup-specific changes in fertility associated with complete or 6-week abortion bans in 14 US states. The average percent and absolute change in the fertility rate among females aged 15 through 44 years was estimated overall and by state, and within and across states by age, race and ethnicity, marital status, education, and insurance payer.

Exposure: Complete or 6-week abortion ban.

Main outcome and measures: Fertility rate (births per 1000 reproductive-aged females) overall and by subgroups.

Results: There were an estimated 1.01 (95% credible interval [CrI], 0.45-1.64) additional births above expectation per 1000 females aged 15 through 44 years (reproductive age) in states following adoption of abortion bans (60.55 observed vs 59.54 expected; 1.70% increase; 95% CrI, 0.75%-2.78%), equivalent to 22 180 excess births, with evidence of variation by state and subgroup. Estimated differences above expectation were largest for racially minoritized individuals (≈2.0%), unmarried individuals (1.79%), individuals younger than 35 years (≈2.0%), Medicaid beneficiaries (2.41%), and those without college degrees (high school diploma, 2.36%; some college, 1.58%), particularly in southern states. Differences in race and ethnicity and education across states explain most of the variability in the state-level association between abortion bans and fertility rates.

Conclusion and relevance: These findings provide evidence that fertility rates in states with abortion bans were higher than would have been expected in the absence of these policies, with the largest estimated differences among subpopulations experiencing the greatest structural disadvantages and in states with among the worst maternal and child health and well-being outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
45.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA, published continuously since 1883, is an international peer-reviewed general medical journal. JAMA is a member of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications.
×
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