Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Women's Health 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research article

Reducing underreporting of stigmatized pregnancy outcomes: results from a mixed-methods study of self-managed abortion in Texas using the list-experiment method

Authors: Heidi Moseson, Sofia Filippa, Sarah E. Baum, Caitlin Gerdts, Daniel Grossman

Published in: BMC Women's Health | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Accurately measuring stigmatized experiences is a challenge across reproductive health research. In this study, we tested a novel method – the list experiment – that aims to reduce underreporting of sensitive events by asking participants to report how many of a list of experiences they have had, not which ones. We applied the list experiment to measure “self-managed abortion” - any attempt by a person to end a pregnancy on one’s own, outside of a clinical setting – a phenomenon that may be underreported in surveys due to a desire to avoid judgement.

Methods

We administered a double list experiment on self-managed abortion to a Texas-wide representative sample of 790 women of reproductive age in 2015. Participants were asked how many of a list of health experiences they had experienced; self-managed abortion was randomly added as an item to half of the lists. A difference in the average number of items reported by participants between lists with and without self-managed abortion provided a population level estimate of self-managed abortion. In 2017, we conducted cognitive interviews with women of reproductive age in four states to understand how women (1) interpreted the list experiment question format, and (2) interpreted the list item on prior experiences attempting to self-manage an abortion.

Results

Results from this list experiment estimated that 8% of women of reproductive age in Texas have ever self-managed an abortion. This number was higher than expected, thus, the researchers conducted cognitive interviews to better understand how people interpreted the list experiment on self-managed abortion. Some women interpreted “on your own” to mean “without the knowledge of friends or family”, as opposed to “without medical assistance”, as intended.

Conclusion

The list experiment may have reduced under-reporting of self-managed abortion; however, the specific phrasing of the list item may also have unintentionally increased reporting of abortion experiences not considered “self-managed.” High participation in and comprehension of the list experiment, however, suggests that this method is worthy of further exploration as tool for measuring stigmatized experiences.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Stephenas-Davidowitz S. The return of the D.I.Y. abortion. The New York times; 2016. Stephenas-Davidowitz S. The return of the D.I.Y. abortion. The New York times; 2016.
4.
go back to reference Texas policy Evaluation Project. Texas women’s experiences attempting self-induced abortion in Texas. 2015. Texas policy Evaluation Project. Texas women’s experiences attempting self-induced abortion in Texas. 2015.
6.
go back to reference Jagannathan R. Relying on surveys to understand abortion behavior: some cautionary evidence. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1826–31.CrossRef Jagannathan R. Relying on surveys to understand abortion behavior: some cautionary evidence. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:1826–31.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Jones E, Forrest J. Underreporting of abortion in surveys of US women: 1976-1988. Demography. 1992;29:113–26.CrossRef Jones E, Forrest J. Underreporting of abortion in surveys of US women: 1976-1988. Demography. 1992;29:113–26.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Anderson B, Katus K, Puur A, Silver B. The validity of survey responses on abortion: evidence from Estonia. Demography. 1994;31:115–32.CrossRef Anderson B, Katus K, Puur A, Silver B. The validity of survey responses on abortion: evidence from Estonia. Demography. 1994;31:115–32.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jones E, Forrest J. Use of a supplementary survey of abortion patients to correct contraceptive failure rates for underreporting of abortion. In: Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, editor. Anonymous measuring the dynamics of contraceptive use: proceedings of the United Nations expert group meeting. New York, NY: Population Division; 1991. p. 139–52. Jones E, Forrest J. Use of a supplementary survey of abortion patients to correct contraceptive failure rates for underreporting of abortion. In: Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations, editor. Anonymous measuring the dynamics of contraceptive use: proceedings of the United Nations expert group meeting. New York, NY: Population Division; 1991. p. 139–52.
10.
go back to reference London K, Williams L. A comparison of abortion underreporting in an in-person interview and a self-administered questionnaire. 1990. “A comparison of abortion underreporting in an in-person interview and a self administered questionnaire”. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the population Association of America. Toronto. London K, Williams L. A comparison of abortion underreporting in an in-person interview and a self-administered questionnaire. 1990. “A comparison of abortion underreporting in an in-person interview and a self administered questionnaire”. In: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the population Association of America. Toronto.
12.
go back to reference Rossier C. Measuring abortion with the anonymous third party reporting method. In: Singh S, Remez L, Tartaglione A, editors. Methodologies for estimating abortion incidence and abortion-related morbidity: a review. New York, NY: Guttmacher Institute;International Union for the Scientific Study of Population; 2010. p. 99–106. Rossier C. Measuring abortion with the anonymous third party reporting method. In: Singh S, Remez L, Tartaglione A, editors. Methodologies for estimating abortion incidence and abortion-related morbidity: a review. New York, NY: Guttmacher Institute;International Union for the Scientific Study of Population; 2010. p. 99–106.
15.
go back to reference Moseson H, Gerdts C, Dehlendorf C, Hiatt R, Vittinghoff E. Multivariable regression analysis of list experiment data on abortion: results from a large, randomly-selected population based study in Liberia. Popul Health Metrics. 2017;15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12963-017-0157-x. Moseson H, Gerdts C, Dehlendorf C, Hiatt R, Vittinghoff E. Multivariable regression analysis of list experiment data on abortion: results from a large, randomly-selected population based study in Liberia. Popul Health Metrics. 2017;15. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12963-017-0157-x.
16.
go back to reference Miller J, Harrel A, Cisin I. A new technique for surveying deviant behavior: item-count estimates of marijuana, cocaine and heroin; 1986. Miller J, Harrel A, Cisin I. A new technique for surveying deviant behavior: item-count estimates of marijuana, cocaine and heroin; 1986.
17.
go back to reference Droitcour J, Caspar R, Hubbard M, Parsley T, Visscher W, Ezzati T. The item count technique as a method of indirect questioning: a review of its development and a case study application. In: Biemer P, Groves R, Lyberg L, Mathiowetz N and Sudman S, editors. Measurement error in surveys. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 1991. Droitcour J, Caspar R, Hubbard M, Parsley T, Visscher W, Ezzati T. The item count technique as a method of indirect questioning: a review of its development and a case study application. In: Biemer P, Groves R, Lyberg L, Mathiowetz N and Sudman S, editors. Measurement error in surveys. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 1991.
18.
go back to reference Sniderman P, Tetlock P, Piazza T. Codebook for the 1991 National Race and politics survey. Survey Research Center. 1992. Sniderman P, Tetlock P, Piazza T. Codebook for the 1991 National Race and politics survey. Survey Research Center. 1992.
20.
go back to reference Kuklinski J, Cobb M, Gilens M. Racial attitudes and the "new south". J Polit. 1997;59:323.CrossRef Kuklinski J, Cobb M, Gilens M. Racial attitudes and the "new south". J Polit. 1997;59:323.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Cowan S, Wu L, Makela S, England P. Alternative estimates of lifetime prevalence of abortion from indirect survey questioning methods. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2016;48.CrossRef Cowan S, Wu L, Makela S, England P. Alternative estimates of lifetime prevalence of abortion from indirect survey questioning methods. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2016;48.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Glynn A. What can we learn with statistical truth serum? Design and analysis of the list experiment; 2010. Glynn A. What can we learn with statistical truth serum? Design and analysis of the list experiment; 2010.
23.
go back to reference Jwo S, Mansfield W. The GfK Group Project Report for the Family Planning: TX Women Study. 2015;310.111.00373.1. Jwo S, Mansfield W. The GfK Group Project Report for the Family Planning: TX Women Study. 2015;310.111.00373.1.
24.
go back to reference Grossman D, White K, Fuentes L, et al. Knowledge, opinion and experience related to abortion self-induction in Texas. 2015.CrossRef Grossman D, White K, Fuentes L, et al. Knowledge, opinion and experience related to abortion self-induction in Texas. 2015.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Grossman D, White K, Hopkins K, Potter J. The public health threat of anti-abortion legislation. Contraception. 2014;89:73–4.CrossRef Grossman D, White K, Hopkins K, Potter J. The public health threat of anti-abortion legislation. Contraception. 2014;89:73–4.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Reducing underreporting of stigmatized pregnancy outcomes: results from a mixed-methods study of self-managed abortion in Texas using the list-experiment method
Authors
Heidi Moseson
Sofia Filippa
Sarah E. Baum
Caitlin Gerdts
Daniel Grossman
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Women's Health / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6874
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0812-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

BMC Women's Health 1/2019 Go to the issue