Skip to main content

Fatal flaws in a recent meta-analysis on abortion and mental health

Author(s): Steinberg, J.R.; Trussell, James; Hall, Kelli S.; Guthrie, K.

To refer to this page use:
Abstract: Similar to other reviews within the last 4 years, a thorough review by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, published in December 2011, found that compared to delivery of an unintended pregnancy, abortion does not increase women’s risk of mental health problems. In contrast, a meta-analysis published in September 2011 concluded that abortion increases women’s risk of mental health problems by 81% and that 10% of mental health problems are attributable to abortions. Like others, we strongly question the quality of this meta-analysis and its conclusions. Here we detail seven errors of this meta-analysis and three significant shortcomings of the included studies because policy, practice, and the public have been misinformed. These errors and shortcomings render the meta-analysis’ conclusions invalid.
Publication Date: 2012
Citation: Steinberg, J.R., Trussell, J., Hall, K.S., Guthrie, K. (2012). Fatal flaws in a recent meta-analysis on abortion and mental health. Contraception, 86 (430 - 437). doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.03.012
DOI: doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2012.03.012
ISSN: 0010-7824
Pages: 430 - 437
Type of Material: Journal Article
Journal/Proceeding Title: Contraception
Version: Author's manuscript

Items in OAR@Princeton are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.