论文标题
谷歌流产:美国的搜索引擎堕胎可及性调解
Googling for Abortion: Search Engine Mediation of Abortion Accessibility in the United States
论文作者
论文摘要
在无数次流产的障碍中,危机妊娠中心(CPC)通过针对意外或“危机”怀孕的妇女造成了额外的困难,以免避免手术。网络搜索引擎可能被证明是另一个障碍,处于有力的位置,可以将用户引导到健康信息,最重要的是健康服务。在这项研究中,我们询问Google搜索对搜索堕胎提供者的用户的质量响应,特别是在将其引导到堕胎诊所(ACS)或CPC方面。为了回答这个问题,我们考虑了一名在线寻找堕胎服务的妇女的情况,并从美国467个地点进行了10次与堕胎有关的查询,持续14周。总体而言,在Google的位置结果中,与地图一起以企业为特色,ACS为79.4%,CPC为6.9%。当AC返回时,它是最接近的AC位置,有86.9%的时间。但是,当CPC出现在结果集中时,它是最接近搜索位置的时间75.9%的时间。检查AC结果的相关性,我们发现,从较贫穷和农村地区进行搜索的AC结果较少,以及管理AC设施和临床医生要求的陷阱法律的结果。我们还观察到,在重大算法更新之后,Google在查询中的性能大大提高。这些结果对个人用户和公共卫生政策具有有关健康访问质量和公平性的重要含义。
Among the myriad barriers to abortion access, crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) pose an additional difficulty by targeting women with unexpected or "crisis" pregnancies in order to dissuade them from the procedure. Web search engines may prove to be another barrier, being in a powerful position to direct their users to health information, and above all, health services. In this study we ask, to what degree does Google Search provide quality responses to users searching for an abortion provider, specifically in terms of directing them to abortion clinics (ACs) or CPCs. To answer this question, we considered the scenario of a woman searching for abortion services online, and conducted 10 abortion-related queries from 467 locations across the United States once a week for 14 weeks. Overall, among Google's location results that feature businesses alongside a map, 79.4% were ACs, and 6.9% were CPCs. When an AC was returned, it was the closest known AC location 86.9% of the time. However, when a CPC appeared in a result set, it was the closest one to the search location 75.9% of the time. Examining correlates of AC results, we found that fewer AC results were returned for searches from poorer and rural areas, and those with TRAP laws governing AC facility and clinician requirements. We also observed that Google's performance on our queries significantly improved following a major algorithm update. These results have important implications concerning health access quality and equity, both for individual users and public health policy.