These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
22. The role of women in abortion jurisprudence: from Roe to Casey and beyond. Martin PA Camb Q Healthc Ethics; 1993; 2(3):309-19. PubMed ID: 8293219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Projected Implications of Overturning Roe v Wade on Abortion Training in U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Programs. Vinekar K; Karlapudi A; Nathan L; Turk JK; Rible R; Steinauer J Obstet Gynecol; 2022 Aug; 140(2):146-149. PubMed ID: 35852261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The laws that affect abortion in the United States and their impact on women's health. Harrison LK; Naylor KL Nurse Pract; 1991 Dec; 16(12):53-9. PubMed ID: 1798604 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The unprecedented increase in Google searches for "vasectomy" after the reversal of Roe vs. Wade. Sellke N; Tay K; Sun HH; Tatem A; Loeb A; Thirumavalavan N Fertil Steril; 2022 Dec; 118(6):1186-1188. PubMed ID: 36180257 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. The survival of the pro-choice movement. Staggenborg S J Policy Hist; 1995; 7(1):160-76. PubMed ID: 12346343 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparing options for females seeking permanent contraception in high resource countries: a systematic review. Gormley R; Vickers B; Cheng B; Norman WV Reprod Health; 2021 Jul; 18(1):154. PubMed ID: 34284794 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Bare court majority reaffirms Roe, but standard for reviewing state laws is relaxed. Wash Memo Alan Guttmacher Inst; 1992 Jul; (11):1-3. PubMed ID: 12286280 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The Court is ignoring science. Foster DG Science; 2022 May; 376(6595):779. PubMed ID: 35575724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. U.S. Supreme Court on abortion. Roe v. Wade, 41 U.S.L.W. 4213(1973). Conn Med; 1973 Jun; 37(6):279-89. PubMed ID: 4706076 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Long-term benefits and risks of alternative methods of fertility control in the United States. Kawachi I; Colditz GA; Hankinson S Contraception; 1994 Jul; 50(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 7924318 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Roe v. Wade. Revisiting the fundamentals. Benshoof J Conscience; 1998; 18(4):16-7. PubMed ID: 12178876 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Search Trends Signal Increased Vasectomy Interest in States with Sparsity of Urologists after Overrule of Roe vs. Wade. Patel RD; Loloi J; Labagnara K; Watts KL J Urol; 2022 Oct; 208(4):759-761. PubMed ID: 36082550 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. The role of stare decisis in the reconsideration of Roe v. Wade. Blaustein AP; Grant ER; Lohr AL; Todd KJ Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):204-10. PubMed ID: 2603863 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Internet Searches for Self-Managed Abortion After Roe v Wade Overturned. Flores L; Kelani Z; Chandwani C; Young SD JAMA Surg; 2023 Sep; 158(9):976-977. PubMed ID: 37405767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. What happens to contraception when anti-abortion laws pass? Contracept Technol Update; 1991 Sep; 12(9):143-4. PubMed ID: 12317311 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Brief for 885 law professors in support of maintaining adherence to the Roe decision. Michelman FI; Redlich N; Neuwirth SR; Carty-Bennia D Am J Law Med; 1989; 15(2-3):197-203. PubMed ID: 2603862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]