MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118928251 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1040341

Characteristics of women undergoing repeat induced abortion

2005· article· en· W2118928251 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
William A. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersLondon Health Sciences Centre
KeywordsAbortionMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalObstetricsPregnancyDemographyLogistic regressionGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although repeat induced abortion is common, data concerning characteristics of women undergoing this procedure are lacking. We conducted this study to identify the characteristics, including history of physical abuse by a male partner and history of sexual abuse, of women who present for repeat induced abortion. METHODS: We surveyed a consecutive series of women presenting for initial or repeat pregnancy termination to a regional provider of abortion services for a wide geographic area in southwestern Ontario between August 1998 and May 1999. Self-reported demographic characteristics, attitudes and practices regarding contraception, history of relationship violence, history of sexual abuse or coercion, and related variables were assessed as potential correlates of repeat induced abortion. We used chi2 tests for linear trend to examine characteristics of women undergoing a first, second, or third or subsequent abortion. We analyzed significant correlates of repeat abortion using stepwise multivariate multinomial logistic regression to identify factors uniquely associated with repeat abortion. RESULTS: Of the 1221 women approached, 1145 (93.8%) consented to participate. Data regarding first versus repeat abortion were available for 1127 women. A total of 68.2%, 23.1% and 8.7% of the women were seeking a first, second, or third or subsequent abortion respectively. Adjusted odds ratios for undergoing repeat versus a first abortion increased significantly with increased age (second abortion: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.09; third or subsequent abortion: 1.11, 95% CI 1.07-1.15), oral contraceptive use at the time of conception (second abortion: 2.17, 95% CI 1.52-3.09; third or subsequent abortion: 2.60, 95% CI 1.51-4.46), history of physical abuse by a male partner (second abortion: 2.04, 95% CI 1.39-3.01; third or subsequent abortion: 2.78, 95% CI 1.62-4.79), history of sexual abuse or violence (second abortion: 1.58, 95% CI 1.11-2.25; third or subsequent abortion: 2.53, 95% CI 1.50-4.28), history of sexually transmitted disease (second abortion: 1.50, 95% CI 0.98-2.29; third or subsequent abortion: 2.26, 95% CI 1.28-4.02) and being born outside Canada (second abortion: 1.83, 95% CI 1.19-2.79; third or subsequent abortion: 1.75, 95% CI 0.90-3.41). INTERPRETATION: Among other factors, a history of physical or sexual abuse was associated with repeat induced abortion. Presentation for repeat abortion may be an important indication to screen for a current or past history of relationship violence and sexual abuse.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations179
Published2005
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207