Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 15, 2025

A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
No-Test Screening Protocols May Disproportionately Exclude Structurally Oppressed Communities Who Could Benefit from
M Antonia Biggs1, Lauren Ralph1, Katherine Ehrenreich1
1Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, Oakland, California, USA.
Objective:
To explore disparities in ineligibility for medication abortion using no-test screening criteria compared with assessment with testing including ultrasound.
Methods:
From June 2021 to December 2022, we surveyed patients ages ≥15 seeking abortion at nine recruitment facilities in eight U.S. states before ultrasound; clinicians assessed patients' eligibility for medication abortion with ultrasound and other testing. Using clinical guidelines and the no-test protocol criteria, we estimated (1) the proportion ineligible by no-test assessment (pregnancy duration and ectopic pregnancy risk factors as reported in patient surveys and clinician-reported assessment of other contraindications) and (2) the proportion ineligible using no-test criteria yet eligible with testing (false positives). We assessed associations between participant characteristics and ineligibility for medication abortion and reasons for ineligibility.
Results:
We approached 2,846 people, of whom 1,591 were eligible for the study. Of the 1,386 who consented and had complete clinician data, 21.1% (306/1,386) were ineligible with testing, 71.5% (n = 991/1,386) were ineligible using no-test criteria, and 51.4% (n = 713/1,386) screened false positive. In adjusted analyses, ineligibility using no-test criteria was significantly greater among people ages 15-19 (86.8% [105/121] vs. 71.5% for full sample, p < 0.001) and experiencing food or housing insecurity (75.8% [525/690] vs. 67.2%[464/693], p < 0.01); people ages 20-24 were more likely to screen false positive (56.1% [263/469] vs. 51.4% for full sample [713/1,386], p = 0.03). Moderate/severe pelvic pain was the most common (614/1,386) patient-reported reason for ineligibility and reported significantly more by people ages 15-19, who were nulliparous, and experienced food or housing insecurity.
Conclusions:
Screening criteria for no-test medication abortion may exclude many people who are eligible, disproportionately excluding certain population groups from getting the care they seek. More research is needed to improve screening criteria to ensure equitable access to no-test medication abortion.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Birth Control Methods
Factors Affecting Drug Distribution: Physiological Barriers
The capillary endothelial barrier allows only smaller molecules below 600 Da (Daltons) to pass through. It also restricts drugs like heparin that are bound to blood components, limiting their movement within the bloodstream.
The...
Drug Control Governance: Regulatory Bodies and Their Impact

