↓ Skip to main content

Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception Are Substitutes

Overview of attention for article published in Demography, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
Title
Population Policy: Abortion and Modern Contraception Are Substitutes
Published in
Demography, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13524-016-0492-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grant Miller, Christine Valente

Abstract

A longstanding debate exists in population policy about the relationship between modern contraception and abortion. Although theory predicts that they should be substitutes, the empirical evidence is difficult to interpret. What is required is a large-scale intervention that alters the supply (or full price) of one or the other and, importantly, that does so in isolation (reproductive health programs often bundle primary health care and family planning-and in some instances, abortion services). In this article, we study Nepal's 2004 legalization of abortion provision and subsequent expansion of abortion services, an unusual and rapidly implemented policy meeting these requirements. Using four waves of rich individual-level data representative of fertile-age Nepalese women, we find robust evidence of substitution between modern contraception and abortion. This finding has important implications for public policy and foreign aid, suggesting that an effective strategy for reducing expensive and potentially unsafe abortions may be to expand the supply of modern contraceptives.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Croatia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 127 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 23 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 15%
Researcher 18 14%
Student > Master 16 12%
Other 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 26 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 33 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 21%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 27 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,106,819
of 24,929,945 outputs
Outputs from Demography
#296
of 2,022 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,085
of 363,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Demography
#5
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,929,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,022 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,964 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.