The Post-Roe Political Landscape Demands a Morality of Caution for Women's Health

Digital versus non-digital health interventions to improve iron supplementation in pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To investigate the effects of digital health interventions for improving adherence to oral iron supplementation in pregnant women.

Literature search

Five databases were searched from their inception to October 2023 with no date restrictions.

Study selection

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effects of digital health interventions on adherence to oral iron supplementation (e.g., tablets and capsules) compared to non-digital health interventions for pregnant women were eligible.

Data synthesis

We calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous variables using the inverse variance method. We calculated odds ratios (OR) with 95%CI for categorical variables using the Mantel-Haenszel model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The risk of bias of the included RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2.0.

Results

Ten trials with 1,633 participants were included. Based on 7 trials, digital health interventions can improve objective adherence rate comparing with non-digital health interventions (1,289 participants, OR = 4.07 [2.19, 7.57], p < 0.001, I2 = 69%) in pregnant women. Digital health interventions can improve subjective adherence behavior comparing with non-digital health interventions (3 trials, 434 participants, SMD = 0.82 [0.62, 1.01], p < 0.001, I2 = 0%) in pregnant women. Based on 3 trials, digital health interventions can improve tablets consumption comparing with non-digital health interventions (333 participants, SMD = 1.00 [0.57, 1.42], p < 0.001, I2 = 66%) in pregnant women. Digital health interventions can improve hemoglobin level comparing with non-digital health interventions (7 trials, 1,216 participants, MD = 0.59 [0.31, 0.88], p < 0.001, I2 = 93%) in pregnant women.

Conclusion

Digital health interventions were effective at improving adherence to oral iron supplementation and hemoglobin levels in pregnant women.

Reasons for participation in abortion research in restrictive settings

OBJECTIVES

Following the implementation of a restrictive abortion law in Texas (Senate Bill 8), we conducted in-depth interviews with pregnant people about their experiences seeking abortion care. In this analysis, we explore participants' motivations for taking part in a research study.

STUDY DESIGN

Between October 2021 and August 2022, we conducted 120 in-depth interviews with Texans (aged ≥15 years) who, after considering abortion, had a facility-based abortion, self-managed their abortion, experienced miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy, or continued their pregnancy. We asked all interviewees, "Why did you decide to participate in the interview?" For analysis, we used inductive and deductive coding approaches to explore motivations for and concerns about participation.

RESULTS

Most commonly, interviewees appreciated the opportunity to share their stories, frequently describing how their experiences highlight the nuance of abortion decision-making and challenge stigmatized views about abortion. Some described an emotional benefit of participating, as they had no one else to whom to disclose their experience without judgment. Many hoped to help others by participating, saying that access to other people's stories would have helped them feel less isolated. Relatedly, many viewed their participation as an opportunity to speak out against restrictive policies that caused them harm, hardship, and distress. Interviewees seldom cited the monetary incentive alone as motivation for participation. A few expressed concerns about participating out of fear of legal repercussions for others involved in their abortion process (e.g., ride-share driver). These themes were consistent across pregnancy outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Research volunteers are motivated to participate for altruistic and self-benefiting reasons.

IMPLICATIONS

This study provides insights into what people seeking abortion consider when deciding to participate in qualitative research. Research ethics committees evaluating and researchers conducting abortion research should weigh these motivations, perceived benefits, and concerns. Policies that enhance protections for participant data are needed to support knowledge generation from abortion research.

Renewed calls for abortion-related research in the post-Roe era

Nearly 50 years after Roe versus Wade, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health Organization unraveled the constitutional right to abortion, allowing individual states to severely restrict or ban the procedure. In response, leading medical, public health, and community organizations have renewed calls for research to elucidate and address the burgeoning social and medical consequences of new abortion restrictions. Abortion research not only includes studies that establish the safety, quality, and efficacy of evidence-based abortion care protocols, but also encompasses studies on the availability of abortion care, the consequences of being denied an abortion, and the legal and social burdens surrounding abortion. The urgency of these calls for new evidence underscores the importance of ensuring that research in this area is conducted in an ethical and respectful manner, cognizant of the social, political, and structural conditions that shape reproductive health inequities and impact each stage of research-from protocol design to dissemination of findings. Research ethics relates to the moral principles undergirding the design and execution of research projects, and concerns itself with the technicalities of ethical questions related to the research process, such as informed consent, power relations, and confidentiality. Critical insights and reflections from reproductive justice, community engagement, and applied ethics frameworks have bolstered existing research ethics scholarship and discourse by underscoring the importance of meaningful engagement with community stakeholders-bringing attention to overlapping structures of oppression, including racism, sexism, and ways that these structures are perpetuated in the research process.