The IPUMS Contextual Determinants of Health (CDOH) data series includes measures of disparities, policies, and counts, by state or county, for historically marginalized populations in the United States including Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latina/o/e/x, and LGBTQ+ persons, and women. The IPUMS CDOH data are made available through ICPSR/DSDR for merging with the National Couples' Health and Time Study (NCHAT), United States, 2020-2021 (ICPSR 38417) by approved restricted data researchers. All other researchers can access the IPUMS CDOH data via the IPUMS CDOH website. Unlike other IPUMS products, the CDOH data are organized into multiple categories related to Race and Ethnicity, Sexual and Gender Minority, Gender, and Politics. The CDOH measures were created from a wide variety of data sources (e.g., IPUMS NHGIS, the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Movement Advancement Project, and Myers Abortion Facility Database). Measures are currently available for states or counties from approximately 2015 to 2020. The Gender measures in this release include state-level abortion access, which reports the proportion of a state's females aged 15-44 who reside in counties with an abortion provider by year and month from 2009-2022. To work with the IPUMS CDOH data, researchers will need to first merge the NCHAT data to DS1 (MATCH ID and State FIPS Data). This merged file can then be linked to the IPUMS CDOH datafile (DS2) using the STATEFIPS variable.

The IPUMS Contextual Determinants of Health (CDOH) data series includes measures of disparities, policies, and counts, by state or county, for historically marginalized populations in the United States including Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latina/o/e/x, and LGBTQ+ persons, and women. The IPUMS CDOH data are made available through ICPSR/DSDR for merging with the National Couples' Health and Time Study (NCHAT), United States, 2020-2021 (ICPSR 38417) by approved restricted data researchers. All other researchers can access the IPUMS CDOH data via the IPUMS CDOH website. Unlike other IPUMS products, the CDOH data are organized into multiple categories related to Race and Ethnicity, Sexual and Gender Minority, Gender, and Politics. The CDOH measures were created from a wide variety of data sources (e.g., IPUMS NHGIS, the Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Movement Advancement Project, and Myers Abortion Facility Database). Measures are currently available for states or counties from approximately 2015 to 2020. The Gender measures in this release include the state-level poverty ratio, which compares the proportion of females living in poverty to the proportion of males living in poverty in a given state in a given year. To work with the IPUMS CDOH data, researchers will need to first merge the NCHAT data to DS1 (MATCH ID and State FIPS Data). This merged file can then be linked to the IPUMS CDOH datafile (DS2) using the STATEFIPS variable.

IntroductionPrior research found that suicidality increased among commercially insured birthing people between 2006 and 2017. The 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision overturned Roe v. Wade and made obtaining an abortion more difficult across the United States, which may have negative mental health effects among commercially insured birthing people.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional analysis using mixed-effects logistic regression models to quantify the relationship between state-level abortion restrictions and a diagnosis of suicidality or self-harm in the 12 months before or after delivery among individuals with employer-sponsored health insurance in the United States who delivered between 2010 and 2020.ResultsOf the 610,177 deliveries in our final analytic cohort, birthing people residing in states with high abortion restrictiveness were younger (12.8% of birthing people were ages 15–24 compared to 7.8% in low restriction states) and more likely to be Black (10.4% compared to 6.1%). Birthing people living in states with high abortion restrictiveness were more likely to experience suicidality than birthing people living in states with low abortion restrictiveness [odds ratio (OR): 1.5; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.8; p = 0.0012]. When controlling for age, state abortion restrictiveness was not significantly associated with suicidality [adjusted odds ratio (adjOR): 1.2; 95% CI: 1.0, 1.4; p = 0.0603], and birthing people ages 15–24 were substantially more likely than birthing people ages 35–44 to experience suicidality (adjOR: 7.3; 95% CI: 6.5, 8.2; p 

Project Summary: The purpose of this study was to inform experimental testing of new approaches for measuring abortion in surveys in the United States, by improving our understanding of how women interpret and respond to survey items asking them to report their abortion history. Using cognitive interviews, we developed, tested, and evaluated various question wordings, as well as conducted card sort and vignette activities to further discern how participants’ understand and classify abortion. We aimed to test questions to clarify which experiences to report as an abortion; reduce the stigma and sensitivity of abortion; reduce the sense of intrusiveness of asking about abortion; or increase the motivation to report. Question wordings were newly developed or modified versions of existing survey questions. Results from the cognitive interviews were used to develop an experimental survey to further explore how to improve the accuracy of abortion reporting. Research reported in this publication was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute Of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HD084473. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Data Overview: We conducted cognitive interviews with 64 cisgender women in suburban Wisconsin (N=35) in January 2020 and urban New Jersey (N=29) in February 2020. We selected the two study states because of differences in abortion climate and to avoid geographically-specific findings. Participants were recruited to participate in an interview on sexual and reproductive health (SRH) by a third-party recruiting agency. Eligible participants were between the ages of 18 and 49, assigned female at birth, identified as women, spoke English, lived in Wisconsin or New Jersey, and had ever had penile-vaginal sex. Additionally, respondents were asked if they ever had an abortion during the screening process. The decision to include women with various abortion histories was deliberate. We sought to include respondents who may not have disclosed their abortion during the screening process and wanted feedback from all women of reproductive age, as that is the target sample of the experimental survey. We included feedback from both groups of respondents and highlighted their differences when applicable. The study was reviewed and approved by the Guttmacher Institute’s Institutional Review Board. Interviews lasted about 60-90 minutes and were conducted in private rooms at conference and market research locations by two members of the research team (AV and JM; see Interviewer Identities document). Interviews were audio recorded. We obtained verbal consent from all study participants, and they completed a short sociodemographic questionnaire at the end of the interview. Participants received $150 cash as a token of appreciation for their time. Sixteen respondents demonstrated accurate understanding of data sharing and consented to having their data be publicly shared; therefore, these are the only transcripts made available here. Data Collection Overview: The cognitive interview included several sections. In the first section, we asked participants to respond to and provide feedback on various versions of questions about their abortion history. In this section, they disclosed their abortion history directly to the interviewer. In the second section, we asked participants to provide feedback on several different introductory text options that might come before a question about their abortion history. In the third section, we asked participants more general questions about how they would prefer to be asked about whether they’d had an abortion on a survey, as well as their definition of abortion and why some people may choose not to disclose their abortion history. In sections 4 and 5, we conducted a card sort activity and went through a series of vignettes to further discern participants’ understanding and classification of abortion. Each interview was digitally audio recorded (.mp3). The audio recordings were uploaded from the devices to a folder on the Guttmacher network. The audio recordings will be uploaded to the secure, password-protected servers of the professional transcription agency, Datalyst LLC., for transcription. The audio recordings were deleted from the Datalyst servers upon completion of transcription and certification by Guttmacher staff that transcription was accurate/complete. Transcripts were cleaned by one of two team members; during this process, they also removed any potentially identifying information. Audio recordings were deleted from the devices at the end of data collection. The interviewer electronically wrote up immediate thoughts and impressions post-interview in memos (.docx) using a predetermined memo shell that mirrored the major sections of the interview guide. At the end...