ImportanceAbortion facility closures resulted in a substantial decrease in access to abortion care in the US.ObjectivesTo investigate the changes in travel time to the nearest abortion facility after the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization (referred to hereafter as Dobbs) US Supreme Court decision.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsRepeated cross-sectional spatial analysis of travel time from each census tract in the contiguous US (n = 82 993) to the nearest abortion facility (n = 1134) listed in the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health database. Census tract boundaries and demographics were defined by the 2020 American Community Survey. The spatial analysis compared access during the pre-Dobbs period (January-December 2021) with the post-Dobbs period (September 2022) for the estimated 63 718 431 females aged 15 to 44 years (reproductive age for this analysis) in the US (excluding Alaska and Hawaii).ExposuresThe Dobbs ruling and subsequent state laws restricting abortion procedures. The pre-Dobbs period measured abortion access to all facilities providing abortions in 2021. Post-Dobbs abortion access was measured by simulating the closure of all facilities in the 15 states with existing total or 6-week abortion bans in effect as of September 30, 2022.Main Outcomes and MeasuresMedian and mean changes in surface travel time (eg, car, public transportation) to an abortion facility in the post-Dobbs period compared with the pre-Dobbs period and the total percentage of females of reproductive age living more than 60 minutes from abortion facilities during the pre- and post-Dobbs periods.ResultsOf 1134 abortion facilities in the US (at least 1 in every state; 8 in Alaska and Hawaii excluded), 749 were considered active during the pre-Dobbs period and 671 were considered active during a simulated post-Dobbs period. Median (IQR) and mean (SD) travel times to pre-Dobbs abortion facilities were estimated to be 10.9 (4.3-32.4) and 27.8 (42.0) minutes. Travel time to abortion facilities in the post-Dobbs period significantly increased (paired sample t test P <.001) to an estimated median (IQR) of 17.0 (4.9-124.5) minutes and a mean (SD) of and 100.4 (161.5) minutes. In the post-Dobbs period, an estimated 33.3% (sensitivity interval, 32.3%-34.8%) of females of reproductive age lived in a census tract more than 60 minutes from an abortion facility compared with 14.6.% (sensitivity interval, 13.0%-16.9%) of females of reproductive age in the pre-Dobbs period.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this repeated cross-sectional spatial analysis, estimated travel time to abortion facilities in the US was significantly greater in the post-Dobbs period after accounting for the closure of abortion facilities in states with total or 6-week abortion bans compared with the pre-Dobbs period, during which all facilities providing abortions in 2021 were considered active.

BACKGROUND: A decrease in coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination rates has led some states to consider various incentives to boost demand for vaccines. On May 13, 2021, Ohio announced a free weekly lottery for individuals who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccination. This study seeks to rigorously quantify the impact of Ohio's vaccination lottery. METHODS: A synthetic control consisting of a weighted combination of other states was used to approximate the demographic characteristics, new cases, and vaccination rates in Ohio prior to the lottery announcement. The difference in vaccination rates in Ohio and the synthetic control following the lottery announcement was then used to estimate the lottery's impact. RESULTS: Prior to the lottery announcement, Ohio and synthetic Ohio had similar demographic characteristics and new case rates. Ohio and synthetic Ohio also had identical first vaccination rates. By the final lottery enrollment date of June 20, the percentage of the population with first vaccinations increased to 47.41% in Ohio and 46.43% in synthetic Ohio for a difference of 0.98% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.54). CONCLUSION: An additional 114,553 Ohioans received vaccinations as a result of the Vax-a-Million program (95% CI 49,094-180,012

Previous studies on the correlates of organ donation consent have focused on self-reported willingness to donate and on self-reported medical suitability to donate. However, these may be subject to social desirability bias and inaccurate assessments of medical suitability. We sought to overcome these limitations by directly verifying donor designation on driver’s licenses and by abstracting comorbid conditions from electronic health records. Using a cross-sectional study design, we reviewed the health records of 2070 randomly selected primary care patients at a large urban safety-net medical system to obtain demographic and medical characteristics. We also examined driver’s licenses that were scanned into electronic health records as part of the patient registration process for donor designation. Overall, 943 (46%) patients were designated as donors on their driver’s licenses. On multivariate analysis, donor designation was positively associated with age 35–54 years, female gender, non-black race, speaking English or Spanish, being employed, having private insurance, having an income above $45,000, and having fewer comorbid conditions. These demographic and medical characteristics resulted in patient subgroups with donor designation rates ranging from 21% to 75%. In conclusion, patient characteristics are strongly related to verified donor designation. Further work should tailor organ donation efforts to specific subgroups.

COVID-19 vaccination rates among children have stalled, while new coronavirus strains continue to emerge. To improve child vaccination rates, policymakers must better understand parental preferences and reasons for COVID-19 vaccination among their children. Cross-sectional surveys were administered online to 30,174 US parents with at least one child of COVID-19 vaccine eligible age (5–17 years) between January 1 and May 9, 2022. Participants self-reported willingness to vaccinate their child and reasons for refusal, and answered additional questions about demographics, pandemic related behavior, and vaccination status. Willingness to vaccinate a child for COVID-19 was strongly associated with parental vaccination status (multivariate odds ratio 97.9, 95% confidence interval 86.9–111.0). The majority of fully vaccinated (86%) and unvaccinated (84%) parents reported concordant vaccination preferences for their eligible child. Age and education had differing relationships by vaccination status, with higher age and education positively associated with willingness among vaccinated parents. Among all parents unwilling to vaccinate their children, the two most frequently reported reasons were possible side effects (47%) and that vaccines are too new (44%). Unvaccinated parents were much more likely to list a lack of trust in government (41% to 21%, p < .001) and a lack of trust in scientists (34% to 19%, p < .001) as reasons for refusal. Cluster analysis identified three groups of unwilling parents based on their reasons for refusal to vaccinate, with distinct concerns that may be obscured when analyzed in aggregate. Factors associated with willingness to vaccinate children and reasons for refusal may inform targeted approaches to increase vaccination.