Association Between Rates of Down Syndrome Diagnosis in States With vs Without 20-Week Abortion Bans From 2011 to 2018.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: American Medical Association Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101729235 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2574-3805 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 25743805 NLM ISO Abbreviation: JAMA Netw Open Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: Chicago, IL : American Medical Association, [2018]-
    • Subject Terms:
      Down Syndrome*/diagnosis ; Down Syndrome*/epidemiology ; Abortion, Induced* ; Abortion, Spontaneous*/epidemiology; Pregnancy ; Infant, Newborn ; Female ; Humans ; United States/epidemiology ; Adult ; Cohort Studies ; Maternal Age
    • Abstract:
      Importance: Many states enacted 20-week abortion bans from 2011 to 2018. Such bans affect individuals who receive diagnoses of fetal anomalies and aneuploidy in the second trimester, preventing pregnant individuals from having the choice of whether or not to continue the pregnancy.
      Objectives: To examine the trends of neonatal Down syndrome rates and assess the association between enactment of 20-week abortion bans and rates of Down syndrome diagnosis.
      Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, historical cohort study used National Vital Statistics System data on 31 157 506 births in the US from 2011 to 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2021 to February 2023.
      Exposure: States were categorized as those with or without a 20-week abortion ban enacted during the study period.
      Main Outcomes and Measures: Demographic characteristics between the ban and no-ban states were compared using χ2 tests and 2-sample t tests. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the adjusted odds of Down syndrome among births in states that enacted 20-week abortion bans after the abortion ban enactment, adjusting for state, year of birth, maternal race and ethnicity, age, educational level, insurance, and number of prenatal visits.
      Results: The cohort consisted of 31 157 506 births (mean [SD] maternal age, 28.4 [5.9] years) in the United States, of whom 15 951 neonates (0.05%) received a diagnosis of Down syndrome at birth. A total of 17 states enacted 20-week abortion bans during the study period, and 33 states did not enact bans. In both states with and states without bans, the birth prevalence of neonatal Down syndrome increased over time; in states with bans, rates increased from 48.0 to 58.4 per 100 000 births; in states without bans, rates increased from 47.4 to 53.3 per 100 000 births. In multivariable logistic regression assessing the interaction of time and presence of a 20-week abortion ban, the odds of Down syndrome were higher in states that enacted 20-week abortion bans after enactment of the law compared with the years prior to enactment of the ban (adjusted odds ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.11-1.35).
      Conclusions and Relevance: In the US from 2011 to 2018, neonatal Down syndrome diagnoses increased more in states that enacted 20-week abortion bans compared with states that did not enact bans. Because these abortion bans were enacted throughout the study period and are known to inhibit choice in patient decision-making, it is possible that the difference in the rates of diagnosis is associated with these policies.
    • References:
      PLoS One. 2016 Oct 26;11(10):e0165048. (PMID: 27783708)
      Am J Public Health. 2014 Sep;104(9):1687-94. (PMID: 23948000)
      BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Jun 29;3(3):e000692. (PMID: 29989078)
      Contracept X. 2020;2:100043. (PMID: 33083783)
      Birth Defects Res. 2019 Nov 1;111(18):1420-1435. (PMID: 31580536)
      Contraception. 2021 Feb;103(2):121-126. (PMID: 33075334)
      Am J Public Health. 2015 Aug;105(8):e77-82. (PMID: 26066924)
      Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2017 Jan;31(1):67-75. (PMID: 27859434)
      Prenat Diagn. 2012 Feb;32(2):142-53. (PMID: 22418958)
      Am J Public Health. 2016 May;106(5):857-64. (PMID: 26985603)
      Womens Health Issues. 2018 May - Jun;28(3):212-218. (PMID: 29339010)
      Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Oct;213(4):545.e1-4. (PMID: 26070711)
      J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2013 Aug;22(8):706-13. (PMID: 23863075)
      Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jul;225(1):63.e1-63.e8. (PMID: 33577763)
      Public Health Rep. 2011 Mar-Apr;126(2):186-94. (PMID: 21387948)
      Contraception. 2020 May;101(5):293-295. (PMID: 32061568)
      Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Oct;136(4):859-867. (PMID: 32976375)
      Lancet Public Health. 2017 Nov;2(11):e493-e500. (PMID: 29253373)
      Obstet Gynecol. 2017 May;129(5):795-799. (PMID: 28383385)
      Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 26;17(11):. (PMID: 32466506)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20230321 Date Completed: 20230323 Latest Revision: 20230406
    • Publication Date:
      20230406
    • Accession Number:
      PMC10031387
    • Accession Number:
      10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.3684
    • Accession Number:
      36943268