Weight and Procedural Abortion Complications: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the existing empiric evidence regarding a potential relationship between higher body weight and procedural abortion complications. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Our search identified 409 studies, which were uploaded to Covidence for review management; 133 duplicates were automatically removed. A team of two reviewers screened 276 studies, and a third reviewer resolved conflicts. Studies were included if they 1) consisted of peer-reviewed research published between 2010 and 2022, 2) were conducted in the United States, 3) included people with a higher body weight (body mass index [BMI] 30 or higher) in the study sample, and 4) assessed at least one outcome of procedural abortion safety stratified by a measure of body weight. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: We extracted study data using Covidence and calculated an odds ratio for each study to facilitate the synthesis of results. Six studies assessing a total of 38,960 participants were included. No studies found a significant relationship between procedural abortion complications and higher body weight overall. Subgroup analysis from one study identified a significant increase in complications specifically among participants with BMIs higher than 40 who had second-trimester abortions. All studies used a retrospective cohort design and fulfilled Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria to be considered good quality. Studies varied in terms of clinical settings, patient populations, gestations assessed, clinician training levels, and care protocols. CONCLUSION: Overall, higher body weight was not associated with an increased risk of procedural abortion complications in the included studies. The practice of referring patients undergoing procedural abortion with a higher body weight for hospital-based care is not based on recent safety evidence. On the contrary, this practice threatens the health of people with a higher body weight by potentially delaying their access to abortion care, extending their pregnancies into later gestations, and blocking their ability to access an abortion altogether.
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 | 0.000 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".