{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,11]],"date-time":"2026-02-11T03:17:10Z","timestamp":1770779830623,"version":"3.50.0"},"reference-count":23,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2015,9,1]],"date-time":"2015-09-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1441065600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Academic Health Sciences Centres Alternative Funding Plan Innovations Fund"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["contraceptionjournal.org","clinicalkey.jp","clinicalkey.com","clinicalkey.es","clinicalkey.com.au","clinicalkey.fr","elsevier.com","sciencedirect.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Contraception"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2015,9]]},"DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2015,6,8]],"date-time":"2015-06-08T09:25:33Z","timestamp":1433755533000},"page":"220-226","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/elsevier_cm_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["Comparison of remote and in-clinic follow-up after methotrexate\/misoprostol abortion"],"prefix":"10.1016","volume":"92","author":[{"given":"Sheila","family":"Dunn","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Dilzayn","family":"Panjwani","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Melini","family":"Gupta","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Christopher","family":"Meaney","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Rebecca","family":"Morgan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Erika","family":"Feuerstein","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"78","reference":[{"issue":"3","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0005","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"676","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000444454.67279.7d","article-title":"Practice bulletin no 143: medical management of first trimester abortions","volume":"123","year":"2014","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0010","first-page":"813","article-title":"Comparison of abortions induced by methotrexate or mifepristone followed by misoprostol","volume":"99","author":"Wiebe","year":"2002","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0015","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.1002\/tera.10052","article-title":"Fetal methotrexate and misoprostol exposure: the past revisited","volume":"66","author":"Wheeler","year":"2001","journal-title":"Teratology"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0120","unstructured":"National Abortion Federation, NAF protocol for mifepristone\/misoprostol in early abortion in the US. Revised March 2013. Accessed on December 15, 2014 at: http:\/\/prochoice.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/Mifeprotocol2013.pdf."},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0025","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"738","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000115511.14004.19","article-title":"Routine follow-up visits after first-trimester induced abortion","volume":"103","author":"Grossman","year":"2004","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"143","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2009.08.008","article-title":"Feasibility of telephone follow-up after medical abortion","volume":"81","author":"Perriera","year":"2010","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0035","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"360","DOI":"10.1001\/archfami.7.4.360","article-title":"Acceptability and feasibility of early pregnancy termination by mifepristone-misoprostol","volume":"7","author":"Winikoff","year":"1998","journal-title":"Arch Fam Med"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0040","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"194","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2010.07.023","article-title":"Expanding medical abortion: can medical abortion be effectively provided without the routine use of ultrasound?","volume":"83","author":"Kaneshiro","year":"2011","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0045","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"313","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2004.04.005","article-title":"Ability of the clinician and patient to predict the outcome of mifepristone and misoprostol medical abortion","volume":"70","author":"Rossi","year":"2004","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0050","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"440","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2014.01.010","article-title":"Simplified follow-up after early medical abortion: 12-month experience of a telephone call and self-performed low-sensitivity urine pregnancy test","volume":"89","author":"Michie","year":"2014","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"issue":"2-1","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0055","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"264","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3181c996f3","article-title":"Alternatives to a routine follow-up visit for early medical abortion","volume":"115","author":"Clark","year":"2010","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0060","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"131","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2006.08.001","article-title":"Medication abortion employing routine sequential measurements of serum hCG and sonography only when indicated","volume":"75","author":"Clark","year":"2007","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0065","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"190","DOI":"10.1016\/S0301-2115(03)00012-5","article-title":"Verifying the effectiveness of medical abortion: ultrasound vs hCG testing","volume":"109","author":"Fiala","year":"2003","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0070","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"67","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2011.11.010","article-title":"Telephone follow-up and self-performed urine pregnancy testing after early medical abortion: a service evaluation","volume":"86","author":"Cameron","year":"2012","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0075","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"144","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijgo.2012.11.022","article-title":"Simplified medical abortion using a semi-quantitative pregnancy test for home-based follow-up","volume":"121","author":"Lynd","year":"2013","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"issue":"6","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0080","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"757","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2012.06.005","article-title":"Can at-home semi-quantitative pregnancy tests serve as a replacement for clinical follow-up of medical abortion? A US study","volume":"86","author":"Blum","year":"2012","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0085","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"698","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(14)61054-0","article-title":"Clinical follow-up compared with self assessment of outcome after medical abortion: a multicentre, non-inferiority, randomized, controlled trial","volume":"385","author":"Oppegaard","year":"2015","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0090","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"402","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2011.09.007","article-title":"Comparison of medical abortion follow-up with serum human chorionic gonadotropin testing and in-office assessment","volume":"85","author":"Horning","year":"2012","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0095","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"29","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2014.03.016","article-title":"RUOK? The acceptability and feasibility of remote technologies for follow up after early medical abortion","volume":"90","author":"Bracken","year":"2014","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0125","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"356","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jclinepi.2006.07.015","article-title":"A one-item question with a Likert or Visual Analogue Scale adequately measured current anxiety","volume":"60","author":"Davey","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Clin Epidemiol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0105","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"399","DOI":"10.1080\/00273171.2011.568786","article-title":"An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies","volume":"46","author":"Austin","year":"2011","journal-title":"Multivar Behav Res"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0110","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"41","DOI":"10.1093\/biomet\/70.1.41","article-title":"The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects","volume":"70","author":"Rosenbaum","year":"1983","journal-title":"Biometrika"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013_bb0115","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1080\/13625180802549970","article-title":"Effectiveness of contraceptive counselling of women following abortion: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"14","author":"Ferreira","year":"2009","journal-title":"Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care"}],"container-title":["Contraception"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0010782415002292?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0010782415002292?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,3]],"date-time":"2021-04-03T08:28:44Z","timestamp":1617438524000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/linkinghub.elsevier.com\/retrieve\/pii\/S0010782415002292"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2015,9]]},"references-count":23,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2015,9]]}},"alternative-id":["S0010782415002292"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013","relation":{},"ISSN":["0010-7824"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0010-7824","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2015,9]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Elsevier","name":"publisher","label":"This article is maintained by"},{"value":"Comparison of remote and in-clinic follow-up after methotrexate\/misoprostol abortion","name":"articletitle","label":"Article Title"},{"value":"Contraception","name":"journaltitle","label":"Journal Title"},{"value":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.05.013","name":"articlelink","label":"CrossRef DOI link to publisher maintained version"},{"value":"article","name":"content_type","label":"Content Type"},{"value":"Copyright \u00a9 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright"}]}}