MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416855082 · doi:10.13162/hro-ors.v12i3.6693

Assessing the Impact of Approval of Mifegymiso on Abortion Access and Care in Canada

2025· article· fr· W4416855082 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Allison Poppel, Teagan Mauthe

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Reform Observer - Observatoire des Réformes de Santé · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionEconomic shortageHealth carePublic healthReproductive healthDeveloped countryFamily planningPostponement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approval of Mifegymiso (mifepristone and misoprostol) by Health Canada in 2015 provided a more effective non-invasive option for medical abortions in Canada and aligned Canada with the 60 other countries that had been safely utilizing the drug combination for decades. Initial approval included a number of stipulations and restrictions that were later lifted, paving the way for the drug to be offered via telemedicine under the supervision of a clinician. The approval was anticipated to increase access to abortion services, especially for those in remote and rural areas who may not have been close by to a facility where an abortion procedure could be offered. Public polling shows approval for medication abortion has remained high, especially in the wake of attacks on reproductive health in the United States. Since Health Canada approval and its marketing, the drug is now universally available across Canada with provincial health systems covering the cost for anyone with a valid health card and prescription. Thirty-two percent of abortions in Canada utilize the drug combination. Celopharma remains the only manufacturer in Canada and there have been delays in commercial release and a handful of shortages due to manufacturing issues. L’autorisation du Mifegymiso (mifépristone et misoprostol) par Santé Canada en 2015 a permis d’offrir une option non-invasive plus efficace pour les avortements médicamenteux au Canada et a aligné le Canada sur les 60 autres pays qui utilisaient cette combinaison de médicaments en toute sécurité depuis des décennies. L’autorisation comprenait initialement un certain nombre de conditions et de restrictions qui ont ensuite été levées, ouvrant la voie à la prescription du médicament par télémédecine sous la supervision d’un clinicien. Cette autorisation devrait permettre d’améliorer l’accès aux services d’avortement, en particulier pour les personnes vivant dans des zones reculées et rurales qui n’avaient peut-être pas accès à un établissement proposant des procédures d’avortement. Les sondages d’opinion montrent que le soutien à l’avortement médicamenteux reste élevé, en particulier à la suite des attaques contre la santé reproductive aux États-Unis. Depuis son autorisation par Santé Canada et sa commercialisation, le médicament est désormais disponible partout au Canada et pris en charge par les systèmes de santé provinciaux pour toute personne disposant d’une carte de santé et d’une ordonnance valide. Trente-deux pourcent des avortements au Canada utilisent cette combinaison de médicaments. Celopharma demeure le seul fabricant au Canada et la mise sur le marché a pris du retard et a connu quelques pénuries en raison de problèmes de fabrication.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Reform Observer - Observatoire des Réformes de SantéSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207