MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969029476 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2008.151571

MEDICATION ABORTION AS A QUALITY INDICATOR FOR REGIONAL COMPARISONS IN SWEDEN

2008· letter· en· W1969029476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rickard Ljung, Maria Danielsson, Anna Lindam

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2008
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionMedicinePregnancyDemographyFamily medicineFamily planningAbortion lawConfidence intervalMisoprostolMedical abortionObstetricsPopulationEnvironmental healthResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We were surprised by the extremely low medication abortion rates in Canada as presented by Erdman et al. in the October 2008 issue of the Journal.1 Sweden has relatively high medication abortion rates, but in an effort to further improve abortion care, an indicator on medication and surgical abortion rates is currently used. In 2007, the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, along with the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, published a report comparing 75 quality indicators of various medical outcomes among Sweden's 21 regions.2 One of the 5 indicators of maternal and prenatal care was the percentage of abortions performed before the 10th week of pregnancy. The percentage of medication abortions was included as supplemental data, though it is not specifically meant to indicate higher quality (Figure 1). In general, the higher the percentage of abortions performed before the 10th week of pregnancy, the higher the percentage of medication abortions. One way to interpret this is that the use of medication abortion increases access to abortion care. FIGURE 1 Medication and surgical abortions performed before the 10th week of pregnancy (with 95% confidence intervals) as percentages of all abortions: Sweden, 2005–2007. Fred Montgomery teaches preschool children in a Head Start class sponsored by the Coahoma Project on April 25, 1966, in Clarksdale, Mississippi. Photograph by Charles Kelly. Printed with permission of AP Wide World. The current Swedish law on abortion, which took effect in 1975, provides women with an essentially free abortion until the 18th week of pregnancy. It is wholly up to the woman to decide whether to have an abortion and request that it be performed. Sweden has 9 million citizens, of whom 1.8 million are women of childbearing age. Between 33 000 and 37 000 abortions (18–21 per 1000 women aged 15–44 years) are performed annually, with more than 70% of them done before the 10th week of pregnancy.3,4 Sweden's total fertility rate for 2007 was 1.88, among the highest in Europe. Sweden's personal identity number system enables linkage between the extensive national health care registers and social, economic, and demographic data.5 However, current legislation does not permit registration of a woman who has an abortion under her personal identity number, as it might discourage her from seeking care. Thus, it is not possible to analyze the social and economic patterns of either medication or surgical abortions—or the medical consequences for future pregnancy or health. There is no clear evidence that health care quality differs between medication and surgical abortions, though it has been shown that women prefer having the opportunity to choose among alternative procedures.6–10 However, there is no doubt that an early abortion is safer than a later one. Thus, we advocate the use of a quality indicator that measures the percentage of abortions performed before the 10th week, with supplemental data on the percentage of medication abortions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207