NuclearWarfare (talk | contribs) →Coleman's new meta-analysis: new section |
→Coleman's new meta-analysis: comment |
||
Line 140: | Line 140: | ||
{{user|Anupam}} is attempting to add, rather prominently, a meta-analysis by [[Priscilla K. Coleman]]. Firstly, I would appreciate it if he or anyone else could email me the full text of the article. Secondly, considering her history, I don't believe we should be inserting any study of Coleman's as if it were fact. The article just came out; surely we can wait a month or two before responses come in from the ''BMJ'', ''NEJM'', etc? If you really want to go ahead and add it now, please suggest how we can incorporate into the [[Abortion and mental health#Current and historical reviews|appropriate article section]]. '''<font color="navy">[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|Talk]]</font>)'' 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC) |
{{user|Anupam}} is attempting to add, rather prominently, a meta-analysis by [[Priscilla K. Coleman]]. Firstly, I would appreciate it if he or anyone else could email me the full text of the article. Secondly, considering her history, I don't believe we should be inserting any study of Coleman's as if it were fact. The article just came out; surely we can wait a month or two before responses come in from the ''BMJ'', ''NEJM'', etc? If you really want to go ahead and add it now, please suggest how we can incorporate into the [[Abortion and mental health#Current and historical reviews|appropriate article section]]. '''<font color="navy">[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|Talk]]</font>)'' 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC) |
||
:Hello User:NuclearWarfare, I would request that you kindly revert your edit. I did present the information neutrally as evidenced by my edit. The [http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/199/3/A11.full#sec-3 meta-analysis] was published in the [[British Journal of Psychiatry]] and is a peer-reviewed reliable source. As such, the position should be presented, along with the current information in the article. I hope this helps. With regards, [[User:Anupam|Anupam]]<sup>[[User talk:Anupam|Talk]]</sup> 15:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:45, 1 September 2011
Abortion Start‑class | ||||||||||
|
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
New study from Johns Hopkins University
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28050494/from/ET/ is worth an inclusion I think. 69.249.19.253 (talk) 03:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Mother v. Pregnant Woman, the saga continues
If you have time, please take a look at this discussion regarding the debate on the talk page for Wikiproject Abortion. - Schrandit (talk) 14:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
This article needs to assume that professionals DISAGREE on this major issue. It currently basically assumes only one side.
This article is an example of why many teachers, profs distrust Wikipedia. The viewpoint is (mostly) that "professionals see little or no abortion-related mental health issues". However, one can find various professionals who disagree. (See some of the commentary in the discussion!!!).
Short conclusion: Wikipedia (in this and some other articles on HOT topics) is held CAPTIVE to whatever ideology the editors wish to promote.
How to cover this still-evolving controversial issue? Invite quality professional representatives for both major viewpoints to submit their findings.Lindisfarnelibrary (talk) 20:35, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- What specifically do you dislike? That we state that the American Psychological Association concluded that termination of a first, unplanned pregnancy did not lead to an increased risk of mental health problems, but we don't mention other professional organizations who disagree? (do any exist)? Or that we state the existence of "post-abortion syndrome" is not recognized by any medical or psychological organization when that is not the case? I don't believe this article is one sided, but I do believe the article does not "teach the controversy" or provide both sides equally. This is due to WP:WEIGHT where we are supposed to give due weight to prominent views, and avoid undue weight to minority views. I think it's clear that major psychological organizations and review studies agree that abortion itself does not cause mental illness, while there are correlations demonstrated among other factors. All that said, I'd be interested in hearing what you think is inaccurate or too one-sided in this article specifically. And what you think should be changed. -Andrew c [talk] 22:42, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- I wonder what kind of "professionals" Lindisfarnelibrary is referring to. I doubt they are medical ones. This user also seems unaware of how Wikipedia works in terms of how information is included. (If only qualified professionals volunteered to do all the work!) Sounds like someone disgruntled that their personal belief is not prioritized here over near-100% medical consensus (and most physicians who question all the supporting data tend to have religious agendas).-- TyrS chatties 05:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
For future reference
- Steinberg JR, Finer LB (2010). "Examining the association of abortion history and current mental health: A reanalysis of the National Comorbidity Survey using a common-risk-factors model". Soc Sci Med. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.10.006. PMID 21122964.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - Charles VE, Polis CB, Sridhara SK, Blum RW (2008). "Abortion and long-term mental health outcomes: a systematic review of the evidence". Contraception. 78 (6): 436–50. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2008.07.005. PMID 19014789.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Steinberg JR, Russo NF (2009). "Evaluating research on abortion and mental health". Contraception. 80 (6): 500–3. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2009.06.003. PMID 19913142.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
These should probably be incorporated into the article, if they aren't already. MastCell Talk 04:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
This article is untrue.
This article biased to the point of being false and potentially harmful to society. It off-handedly invalidates the experiences of women who have had abortions and feel depressed or anxious as a result. At a basic, intuitive level, it makes sense that abortion is traumatic experience for some, if not most, women. The procedure is very painful, for one thing. For another, it's scary as hell. For another, the cultural stigma attached to abortion is deep-seated and guilt-inducing. If those aren't basic, trauma-inducing conditions--pain, fear, guilt--then at the very least, this article needs to acknowledge that the wide array of post-abortion care hotlines and support groups exists for a reason.
This article needs be rewritten completely or removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.121.152 (talk) 04:24, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
"Abortion and mental health disorders: evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study"
Attention: This template ({{cite doi}}) is deprecated. To cite the publication identified by doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.108.056499, please use {{cite journal}} (if it was published in a bona fide academic journal, otherwise {{cite report}} with |doi=10.1192/bjp.bp.108.056499
instead.
Here is a quick summary of the article: "In general, the results lead to a middle-of-the-road position that, for some women, abortion is likely to be a stressful and traumatic life event which places those exposed to it at modestly increased risk of a range of common mental health problems...Finally, the findings of this study have some important implications for the legal status of abortion in societies such as New Zealand and the UK, where over 90% of abortions are authorised on the grounds that proceeding with the pregnancy would pose a serious threat to the woman’s mental health."
Not sure if it was discussed in prior archives (quick scan indicates not). Interesting that it appears to contradict many of the other subjects on the matter. This is likely because of convenience sample bias (PMID 21268725; discussion section). But still, worth mentioning? NW (Talk) 13:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hmmm. We do have a section devoted to Fergusson, but I think most of the action on this article pre-dated their 2008 publication. The NZ group has argued, both in the 2008 paper and the 2006 article we cite, that abortion has some element of mental-health risk. That position contradicts most expert-body syntheses of the literature, and as you note, methodological issues have been put forward to explain the discrepancy.
I think the whole article is ripe for a rewrite - the current approach of devoting entire sections to individual primary studies seems inappropriate, and the article could be better organized, more readable, and still cite primary sources such as Fergusson et al. to demonstrate various viewpoints on the issue. MastCell Talk 16:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Potential sources
For future reference:
- Steinberg, Julia R.; Finer, Lawrence B. (2010). "Examining the association of abortion history and current mental health: A reanalysis of the National Comorbidity Survey using a common-risk-factors model". Soc Sci Med. 72 (1): 72–82. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.10.006. PMID 21122964.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Charles, Vignetta E.; Polis, Chelsea B.; Sridhara, Srinivas K.; Blum, Robert W. (2008). "Abortion and long-term mental health outcomes: a systematic review of the evidence". Contraception. 78 (6): 436–50. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2008.07.005. PMID 19014789.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Steinberg, Julia R.; Russo, Nancy Felipe (2009). "Evaluating research on abortion and mental health". Contraception. 80 (6): 500–3. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2009.06.003. PMID 19913142.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Major, B.; Appelbaum, M.; Beckman, L.; Dutton, M. A.; Russo, N. F.; West, C. (2009). "Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence". American Psychologist. 64 (9): 863–890. doi:10.1037/a0017497. PMID 19968372.
- Casey, P. R. (2010). "Abortion among young women and subsequent life outcomes". Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 24 (4): 491–502. doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2010.02.007. PMID 20303829.
- Steinberg, J. R. (2011). "Later Abortions and Mental Health: Psychological Experiences of Women Having Later Abortions—A Critical Review of Research". Women's Health Issues. 21 (3): S44–S48. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2011.02.002. PMID 21530839.
- Munk-Olsen, T.; Laursen, T. M.; Pedersen, C. B.; Lidegaard, Ø.; Mortensen, P. B. (2011). "Induced First-Trimester Abortion and Risk of Mental Disorder". New England Journal of Medicine. 364 (4): 332–339. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0905882. PMID 21268725.
- (1990) As compared to other stressful life events
- Adler, N.; David, H.; Major, B.; Roth, S.; Russo, N.; Wyatt, G. (1990). "Psychological responses after abortion". Science. 248 (4951): 41–44. doi:10.1126/science.2181664. PMID 2181664.
- Finland
- Gissler, M; Hemminki, E; Lönnqvist, J (1996). "Suicides after pregnancy in Finland, 1987–94: register linkage study". BMJ. 313 (7070): 1431–4. PMC 2352979. PMID 8973229.
- New Zealand
- Fergusson, David M.; John Horwood, L.; Ridder, Elizabeth M. (2006). "Abortion in young women and subsequent mental health". J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 47 (1): 16–24. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01538.x. PMID 16405636.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)- Criticism: Dwyer, Judith M; Jackson, Terri (2008). "Unwanted pregnancy, mental health and abortion: untangling the evidence". Aust New Zealand Health Policy. 5: 2. doi:10.1186/1743-8462-5-2. PMC 2390567. PMID 18442413.
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - NZ has different requirements for abortion than the US does: APA "Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion". American Psychological Association. Retrieved 2008-08-28.
{{cite web}}
: Check|url=
value (help); Munk-Olsen, T.; Laursen, T. M.; Pedersen, C. B.; Lidegaard, Ø.; Mortensen, P. B. (2011). "Induced First-Trimester Abortion and Risk of Mental Disorder". New England Journal of Medicine. 364 (4): 332–339. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0905882. PMID 21268725.
- Criticism: Dwyer, Judith M; Jackson, Terri (2008). "Unwanted pregnancy, mental health and abortion: untangling the evidence". Aust New Zealand Health Policy. 5: 2. doi:10.1186/1743-8462-5-2. PMC 2390567. PMID 18442413.
- Fergusson, D. M.; Horwood, L. J.; Boden, J. M. (2008). "Abortion and mental health disorders: Evidence from a 30-year longitudinal study". The British Journal of Psychiatry. 193 (6): 444–451. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.108.056499. PMID 19043144.
- Followup letter: Fergusson, D. M.; Horwood, L. J.; Boden, J. M. (2009). "Abortion and mental health (Correspondence)". The British Journal of Psychiatry. 194 (4): 377–378. doi:10.1192/bjp.194.4.377b. PMID 19336795.
- Positive effects
- Russo, Nancy F.; Zierk, Kristin L. (1992). "Abortion, childbearing, and women's well-being". Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. 23 (4): 269–280. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.23.4.269.
- No positive correlation after controlling for childbearing and resource variables
- Prior mental health issues
- Major, B; Cozzarelli, C; Cooper, ML; Zubek, J; Richards, C; Wilhite, M; Gramzow, RH (2000). "Psychological responses of women after first-trimester abortion". Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 57 (8): 777–84. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.57.8.777. PMID 10920466.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Reardon et al.
- Reardon, DC; Cougle, JR; Rue, VM; Shuping, MW; Coleman, PK; Ney, PG (2003). "Psychiatric admissions of low-income women following abortion and childbirth". CMAJ. 168 (10): 1253–6. PMC 154179. PMID 12743066.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)- Criticized by for failure to follow correlation v. causation: Major, B (2003). "Psychological implications of abortion—highly charged and rife with misleading research". CMAJ. 168 (10): 1257–8. PMC 154180. PMID 12743067.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Criticized by for failure to follow correlation v. causation: Major, B (2003). "Psychological implications of abortion—highly charged and rife with misleading research". CMAJ. 168 (10): 1257–8. PMC 154180. PMID 12743067.
- Suicide
- Schiff, M. A.; Grossman, D. C. (2006). "Adverse perinatal outcomes and risk for postpartum suicide attempt in Washington state, 1987–2001". Pediatrics. 118 (3): e669–75. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0116. PMID 16950958.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help)
- Teenagers
- Zabin, L. S.; Hirsch, M. B.; Emerson, M. R. (1989). "When urban adolescents choose abortion: effects on education, psychological status and subsequent pregnancy". Fam Plann Perspect. 21 (6): 248–55. doi:10.2307/2135377. PMID 2620716.
- What causes stress
- Stotland, N. L. (1992). "The myth of the abortion trauma syndrome". Journal of the American Medical Association. 268 (15): 2078–9. doi:10.1001/jama.268.15.2078. PMID 1404747.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - Kero, A; Högberg, U; Jacobsson, L; Lalos, A (2001). "Legal abortion: a painful necessity". Soc Sci Med. 53 (11): 1481–90. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00436-6. PMID 11710423.
{{cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter|month=
ignored (help) - Casey, PR (1998). "[Psychological effects of abortion]". Servir (in Portuguese). 46 (1): 5–7. PMID 9653372.
NW (Talk) 02:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Coleman's new meta-analysis
Anupam (talk · contribs) is attempting to add, rather prominently, a meta-analysis by Priscilla K. Coleman. Firstly, I would appreciate it if he or anyone else could email me the full text of the article. Secondly, considering her history, I don't believe we should be inserting any study of Coleman's as if it were fact. The article just came out; surely we can wait a month or two before responses come in from the BMJ, NEJM, etc? If you really want to go ahead and add it now, please suggest how we can incorporate into the appropriate article section. NW (Talk) 14:59, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hello User:NuclearWarfare, I would request that you kindly revert your edit. I did present the information neutrally as evidenced by my edit. The meta-analysis was published in the British Journal of Psychiatry and is a peer-reviewed reliable source. As such, the position should be presented, along with the current information in the article. I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 15:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)