Cited by 2Reproductive Health and ContraceptionSocial Media in Health EducationAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health

Exploring Adolescent Abortion Information Sources and Preferences post- Dobbs in the Midwestern United States

Hasselbacher, Lee, Manthena, Vanya, Knifton, Sophie, Quasebarth, Madeline·2025·Journal of Women's Health

Abstract

Adolescents face increasing obstacles to abortion services and information. Limited research post- Dobbs suggests that adolescents turn to social media for information, but more research is needed to understand where adolescents expect to find reliable information about abortion and access to care. We conducted in-depth interviews with participants aged 16–19 years from Midwestern states (Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Michigan, Ohio, and Minnesota) to explore how they engage with abortion information and which sources they trust and prefer. Interviews were conducted via Zoom between April and June 2023 and lasted from 30 to 45 minutes. Interviews were deidentified, transcribed, and coded in Dedoose to identify emergent themes. We interviewed 39 participants from 7 states. Social media emerged as the primary information source for participants, with specific mentions of platforms such as TikTok, Reddit, and YouTube. Many participants expressed skepticism of information on social media and often looked to verify from other sources, including friends or family. If a friend was seeking abortion, most participants emphasized helping them find safe and reliable information online or through trusted sources, like a local Planned Parenthood. In general, participants preferred engaging with reliable, easily accessible abortion online and through social media as well as in school health classes. Adolescents in the Midwestern United States primarily encounter abortion information via social media but rely on more trustworthy sources (e.g., clinics, government websites) for practical information. Trusted organizations and providers supporting youth access to abortion should consider outreach to adolescents via social media and leveraging this trust to direct youth to other validated sources.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/jwh.2024.0563

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 14 · Cited by 2

Authors
Hasselbacher, L., Manthena, V., Knifton, S., & Quasebarth, M.
Affiliations
University of Chicago (US)
Venue
Journal of Women's Health
Published
2025-06
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
804-809
ISSN
  • 1059-7115 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-9996
  • 1931-843X
OpenAlex
W4411200620
Cited by
2
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 2
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Women s Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Keywords
adolescent abortion, social media, trust in information, Planned Parenthood, school-based health education, Midwestern United States
MeSH terms
Abortion, Induced, Information Sources, Adolescent, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Pregnancy, Pregnancy in Adolescence, Midwestern United States, Qualitative Research, Young Adult, Information Seeking Behavior, Social Media

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review