First-trimester medical abortion practices in Canada: National survey.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To understand the current availability and practice of first-trimester medical abortion (MA) in Canada. DESIGN: Using public sources and professional networks, abortion facilities across Canada were identified for a cross-sectional survey on medical and surgical abortion. English and French surveys were distributed by surface or electronic mail between July and November 2013. SETTING: Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 94 abortion facilities were identified. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: tests. RESULTS: A total of 78 of 94 (83.0%) facilities responded. Medical abortion represented 3.8% of first-trimester abortions reported (2706 of 70 860) in 2012. Among the facilities offering MA, 45.0% performed fewer than 500 first-trimester abortions a year, while 35.0% performed more than 1000. More MAs were performed in private offices or ambulatory health centres than in hospitals. Sixty-two physicians from 28 of 78 facilities reported providing first-trimester MA; 87.1% also provided surgical abortion. More than three-quarters of MA physicians were female and 56.5% were family physicians. A preponderance (85.2%) of providers offered methotrexate with misoprostol. Nearly all physicians (90.3%) required patients to have an ultrasound before MA, and 72.6% assessed the completion of the abortion with ultrasonography. Most physicians (74.2%) offered MA through 49 days after the onset of the last menstrual period, and 21.0% offered MA through 50 to 56 days; 37.1% reported providing MA to patients who lived more than 2 hours away. Four physicians from 1 site provided MA via telemedicine. CONCLUSION: In Canada, MA provision using methotrexate and misoprostol is consistent with best-practice guidelines, but MA is rare and its availability is unevenly distributed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".