Back to results
Bibliographic record · Consultation and access
Artículo

History and scientific background on the economics of abortion.

Brittany Moore et al · Public Library of Science (PLoS) · 2021

Supplementary material available
Quick overview. Review the resource’s basic details, then access the content using the main button. This page shows only the information needed to identify, cite, and open the work.

Resource access

Open the content from the main option or choose another available source.

DOAJ DOAJ Articles
Entrar por DOAJ
Main access

Supplementary material available

El enlace apunta a material asociado, anexos, tablas, datos o página complementaria. No se marca como libro/texto completo.
Open material

Summary

Descripción general del contenido del recurso.

<h4>Background</h4>Approximately one quarter of all pregnancies globally end in abortion, making it one of the most common gynecological practices worldwide. Despite the high incidence of abortion around the globe, the synthesis of known economic outcomes of abortion care and policies is lacking. Using data from a systematic scoping review, we synthesized the literature on the economics of abortion at the microeconomic, mesoeconomic, and mesoeconomic levels and presented the results in a collection of studies. This article describes the history and scientific background for collection, presents the scoping review framework, and discusses the value of this knowledge base.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>We conducted a scoping review using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. Studies reporting on qualitative and/or quantitative data from any world region were considered. For inclusion, studies must have examined one of the following outcomes: costs, impacts, benefits, and/or value of abortion-related care or policies. Our searches yielded 19,653 unique items, of which 365 items were included in our final inventory. Studies most often reported costs (n = 262), followed by impacts (n = 140), benefits (n = 58), and values (n = 40). Approximately one quarter (89/365) of studies contained information on the secondary outcome on stigma. Economic factors can lead to a delay in abortion care-seeking and can restrict health systems from adequately meeting the demand for abortion services. Provision of post-abortion care (PAC) services requires more resources then safe abortion services. Lack of insurance or public funding for abortion services can increase the cost of services and the overall economic impact on individuals both seeking and providing care.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Consistent economic themes emerge from research on abortion, though evidence gaps remain that need to be addressed through more standardized methods and consideration to framing of abortion issues in economics terms. Given the highly charged political nature of abortion around the world, it is imperative that researchers continue to build the evidence base on economic outcomes of abortion services and regulations.

How to cite

Elegí el formato que necesitás y copiá la referencia al portapapeles.

APA 7

al, B. M. E. (2021). History and scientific background on the economics of abortion. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257360

MLA

al, Brittany Moore et. "History and scientific background on the economics of abortion." 2021. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257360.

Chicago

al, Brittany Moore et. 2021. "History and scientific background on the economics of abortion.". https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257360.

Harvard

al, B. M. E. 2021, History and scientific background on the economics of abortion, Public Library of Science (PLoS), available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257360 [Accessed 6 Aug. 2026].

Share and print

Save the record, copy its permanent link, or print it as a PDF.

Export reference

You can export the record in common formats for use in a reference manager.

Resource details

Bibliographic information to help confirm that this is the correct material.

Title
History and scientific background on the economics of abortion.
Author / contributors
Brittany Moore et al
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Publication year
2021
ISSN
1932-6203
ISSN
1932-6203
Language
English
Copied