References
- Heisterberg L, Kringelbach M. Early complications after induced first-trimester abortion. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1987;66:201–4
- Hakim-Elahi E, Tovell HM, Burnhill MS. Complications of first-trimester abortion: a report of 170 000 case. Obstet Gynecol 1990;76:129–35
- Kahn JG, Becker BJ, MacIsaa L, et al. The efficacy of medical abortion: a meta-analysis. Contraception 2000;61:29–40
- Zhou W, Nielsen GL, Moller M, Olsen J. Short-term complications after surgically induced abortions: a register-based study of 56 117 abortions. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2002;81:331–6
- APA Task Force Finds Single Abortion Not a Threat to Women’s Mental Health, August 12, 2008. Available from: www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/abortion/
- Rørbye C, Nørgaard M, Nilas L. Medical versus surgical abortion: comparing satisfaction and potential confounders in a partly randomized study. Hum Reprod 2005;20:834–8
- Ashok PW, Hamoda H, Flett GM, et al. Patient preference in a randomized study comparing medical and surgical abortion at 10–13 weeks gestation. Contraception 2005;71:143–8
- Robson SC, Kelly T, Howel D, et al. Randomised preference trial of medical versus surgical termination of pregnancy less than 14 weeks’ gestation (TOPS). Health Technol Assess 2009;13:1–124
- Bachelot A, Cludy L, Spira A. Conditions for choosing between drug-induced and surgical abortions. Contraception 1992;45:547–59
- Slade P, Heke S, Fletcher J, Stewart P. A comparison of medical and surgical termination of pregnancy: choice, emotional impact and satisfaction with care. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:1288–95
- Loeber O. Motivation and satisfaction with early medical vs. surgical abortion in the Netherlands. Reprod Health Matters 2010;18:145–53
- Gibb S, Donaldson C, Henshaw R. Assessing strength of preference for abortion method using ‘willingness to pay’: a useful research technique for measuring values. J Adv Nurs 1998;27:30–6
- Creinin MD. Randomized comparison of efficacy, acceptability and cost of medical versus surgical abortion. Contraception 2000;62:117–24
- Henshaw RC, Naji SA, Russell IT, et al. Comparison of medical abortion with surgical vacuum aspiration: women’s preferences and acceptability of treatment. BMJ 1993;307:714–17
- Moreau C, Trussell J, Desfreres J, et al. Medical vs. surgical abortion: the importance of women's choice. Contraception 201;84:224–9
- Linee di indirizzo sulla Interruzione volontaria di gravidanza con mifepristone e prostaglandine. 24 giugno 2010. Available from: http://www.salute.gov.it/imgs/c_17_pubblicazioni_1302_allegato.pdf
- Beckman LJ, Harvey SM. Experience and acceptability of medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol among U.S. Womens Health Issues 1997;7:253–62
- Winikoff B, Ellertson C, Elul B, et al. Acceptability and feasibility of early pregnancy termination by mifepristone-misoprostol. Results of a large multicenter trial in the United States. Mifepristone Clinical Trials Group. Arch Fam Med 1998;7:360–6
- Honkanen H, von Hertzen H. Users’ perspectives on medical abortion in Finland. Contraception 2002;65:419–23
- Abdel-Aziz E, Hassan IM, Al-Taher H. Assessment of women’s satisfaction with medical termination of pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;24:429–43
- The care of women requesting induced abortion. Evidence based clinical guideline number 7. RCOG. November 2011
- Safe abortion: technical and policy guidance for health systems. 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization; June 2012