Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    The mediation analysis used information provided in Tables 3 and 4. The direct effect of income inequality on life expectancy using the lagged regression models is –.007 (Table 4, Model 4), while the indirect effect is the product of –.002 (Table 3, Model 2) and 2.143 (Table 4, Model 5), or –.004. The total effect is the sum of the direct effect (–.007) and indirect effects (–.004), or –.011. Figure 1 presents the uncertainty of these mediation estimates using the MCMAM procedure. Given that the 95% CI (–.007, .002) contains zero, our analysis supports the null hypothesis of no mediation and suggests that the indirect effect of income inequality on life expectancy through policy liberalism is not likely different from zero, 90% CI (–.006, .001). We also tested our proposed mediation model using the traditional Sobel test, and the results of this test (z = –1.50, SE = .003, p = .13) are also consistent with the null hypothesis of no indirect effect. Evidence for the null hypothesis is also found when estimates from the nonlagged models are used (not shown).

    Claimed Finding:
    The study found no evidence that policy liberalism mediates the relationship between income inequality and life expectancy.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Model 6 in Table 4 shows that the association between lagged income inequality and life expectancy varies by policy liberalism such that the association becomes weaker with increases in policy liberalism (b = .142, p < .01). This pattern looks similar for the nonlagged model (b = .096, p = .056). Furthermore, when alternative measures of inequality are utilized, including the income share of the top .1%, 1%, and 5%, the interaction term between income inequality and policy liberalism remains significant at p < .05.

    Claimed Finding:
    Policy liberalism moderates the income-inequality effect on life expectancy, weakening the negative impact of inequality.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Figure 2 shows how the association between income inequality and life expectancy varies by policy liberalism based on the lagged model (Model 6 of Table 4). Income inequality is more strongly inversely associated with life expectancy among states with relatively low levels of policy liberalism. Among states with average to high levels of policy liberalism, the association between income inequality and life expectancy is reduced to a statistical zero throughout most of this half of the policy liberalism distribution. Also intriguing, the combination of high-income inequality and low policy liberalism results in particularly low levels of life expectancy. Life expectancies are all similar, and relatively high, when inequality is low, as seen in the left side of Figure 2. At higher levels of income inequality, this pattern diverges, however. States with either low-income inequality or high policy liberalism have relatively high life expectancy, but states with both did not have higher life expectancy than those with only one. States with neither low inequality nor high policy liberalism had particularly low life expectancy.

    Claimed Finding:
    States that combine high policy liberalism with high income inequality still experience a strong negative association between inequality and life expectancy.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Table 5 shows more precisely how the association between income inequality and life expectancy varies by policy liberalism. Income inequality is most strongly related to life expectancy in states with the lowest levels of policy liberalism. For instance, in the lagged model, the coefficient for income inequality when policy liberalism is at the bottom 10th percentile is –.033 but is .005 at the 75th percentile—more than a 100% increase. Indeed, income inequality is not statistically associated with life expectancy by the 50th percentile of policy liberalism. Overall, Table 5 presents evidence that any harmful influence of income inequality is smaller or nonexistent in states with more liberal policy environments.

    Claimed Finding:
    At or above the median level of policy liberalism, income inequality shows no significant relationship with life expectancy.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Table 6 shows the marginal associations between income inequality and life expectancy for different levels of each policy domain used to create the overall policy liberalism score using lagged models. Each policy domain was included in the equivalent of Model 6 in Table 4. At least two important points can be gleaned from Table 6. First, it provides evidence that our decision to measure policy liberalism as one variable was a judicious one. Among the 16 policy domains, 13 are consistent with the prior finding that the negative association of income inequality is largest in magnitude within states having the lowest levels of policy liberalism, and it decreases as the policy liberalism percentile increases. Civil rights, taxation, and education were the only policy domains to not meet this general pattern. Second, certain policies were more important than others in understanding the intersection between income inequality and life expectancy. In particular, the interactions between income inequality and several policy domains, including marijuana legalization, environmental protection, gun control, LGBT rights, and health and welfare, were particularly pronounced. For instance, the association between income inequality and life expectancy was –.025 for states at the 10th percentile for environmental protection but .001 for those at the 75th percentile—more than a 100% change. In short, the evidence in Table 6 supports our argument that overall state-level policy liberalism is important for understanding the association between income inequality and life expectancy while also pointing to the differential importance of particular policy domains in these relationships. The marginal effects when income inequality and policy domains were nonlagged five years were consistent with the overall patterns reported here and shown in Table A1 in the Appendix.

    Claimed Finding:
    Every one of the 16 individual policy domains significantly weakened the harmful impact of income inequality on life expectancy.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We performed several ancillary analyses that strengthened evidence for this finding. First, to ensure that states with extremely low or high income inequality were not driving our key results, we ran several additional models that excluded each state from the analysis. Table A2 in the Appendix shows tests for moderation based on Model 6 from Table 4 after excluding the eight states with the highest and lowest levels of income inequality in 2014. These states include New York, Florida, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, and Nebraska. It shows that the same pattern of findings reported previously. We also ran these models after excluding the other 42 states (not shown). These results were also consistent with our reported findings.

    Claimed Finding:
    The interaction between income inequality and policy liberalism remained significant even after omitting states with the most extreme inequality levels.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We also included the Gini coefficient as an additional measure of income inequality. However, our findings for this measure differed substantively from our more reliable findings for the other measures of income inequality. Income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, shared a stronger positive association with life expectancy in states with higher levels of policy liberalism. This pattern is not unprecedented in the literature. For example, Neumayer and Plümper (2016) found that the Gini coefficient was positively associated with life expectancy inequality among developed countries. Hill and Jorgenson (2018) showed that the Gini index shares a different relationship with life expectancy than other inequality indicators. These authors explained that most income inequality indicators capture the extent to which there is a concentration of income among the wealthy (i.e., the upper end of the income distribution) relative to the rest of the population, but the Gini coefficient, by contrast, deals with how much the actual income distribution deviates from the Lorenz curve and does not directly capture the specific location in the distribution where inequality is occurring. For this reason, the Gini coefficient is more sensitive to changes in the middle of the distribution than to changes at the highs and lows of the distribution (Burns 2015). Because our framework implicates the higher end of the income distribution as having a disproportionate influence on population health, the use of the Gini index is not appropriate. For these reasons, we highlight the theoretical and empirical consistency of our results across several income share measures.

    Claimed Finding:
    Analyses using the Gini coefficient produced moderation effects identical to those found with top-income-share measures.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We replicated our analysis using sex-specific life expectancy measures. This ancillary analysis was conducted because (1) others have found gender differences in the relationship between income inequality and state-level mortality (e.g., Hill and Jorgenson 2018) and (2) gender-stratified structural exposures are known to shape population health (Homan 2019). Our finding that the association between income inequality and life expectancy varies by level of policy liberalism did not differ by sex (these results are available on request).

    Claimed Finding:
    When the authors analyzed men and women separately, the moderating effect of policy liberalism on the inequality–life-expectancy link disappeared.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Induction of labor (IOL) rates in the United States have nearly tripled since 1990. We examine official U.S. birth records to document increases in states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Black, Latina, and White women. We test if the increases are associated with changes in demographic characteristics and risk factors among states’ racial-ethnic childbearing populations. Among pregnancies to White women, increases in state IOL rates are strongly associated with changes in risk factors among White childbearing populations. However, the rising IOL rates among pregnancies to Black and Latina women are not due to changing factors in their own populations but are instead driven by changing factors among states’ White childbearing populations. The results suggest systemic racism may be shaping U.S. obstetric care whereby care is not “centered at the margins” but is instead responsive to characteristics in states’ White populations.

    Claimed Finding:
    For Black and Latina women, rising state induction rates were mainly driven by changes in White women’s risk profiles rather than by shifts within their own groups.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Average state IOL rates among births to U.S. Black women increased from about 11% in 1990 to 23% in 2004 and to 33% in 2017. Similar increases in IOL are observed among singleton first births born to U.S. Latina (10%, 21%, 31%) and White women (14%, 28%, 36%). Across this time, we also see substantial changes in the demographic profiles of states’ childbearing populations. Most noteworthy is the increasingly older age distributions of the states’ childbearing populations, with large reductions in the proportion of births to teens (e.g., 43%–17% among Black women) and concomitant increases among women with AMA (e.g., 5%–10% among White women).

    Claimed Finding:
    From 1990 to 2017, induction of labor increased most rapidly among Latina women compared with Black and White women.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    In 1990, the mean IOL rate among states’ singleton first births born to Black, Latina, and White women were 10.8%, 9.6%, and 13.5%, respectively. The rates varied considerably across states. For example, among pregnancies to Black women, IOL rates ranged from 4.9% in Mississippi to 21.9% in Kentucky, and among White women, rates ranged from 8.0% in California to 21.5% in Oregon (for each state’s IOL rate among Black, Latina, and White women in 1990, 2004, and 2017, Appendix B in the online version of the article). Yet IOL rates increased among all states’ childbearing populations between 1990 and 2017. The trends exhibit similar monotonic increases in all states’ IOL rates among the three populations, although trends among White women exhibit some nonlinearity during the 2000s and 2010s. In 2017, the average IOL rate among U.S. states’ Black, Latina, and White women were 33.4%, 31.0%, and 35.9%, respectively. As was the case in 1990, state-based variation in these 2017 rates is high, ranging from 19.3% among Black and Latina women in California to 54.0% among White women in West Virginia.

    Claimed Finding:
    By 2017, average labor induction rates were highest among White women relative to Black and Latina women.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Results from the unconditional means model (Panel A) suggest that only 14% (Latina), 17% (Black), and 23% (White) of variation in U.S. IOL rates between 1990 and 2017 occurred between states ( i . e ., σ0
2(
σε
2 + σ0
2)) . Thus, 77% (White) to 86% (Latina) of variation in U.S. IOL rates occurred within states over time ( i . e ., σε
2(
σε
2 + σ0
2)) , reflecting the large increases in IOL rates observed in Figure 1.

Results from the random slope model (Panel B) indicate that 77% (Black), 78% (Latina), and 79% (White) of the within-states variation is accounted for by a linear approximation of changes in states’ IOL rates ( i . e .,( σεRSM
2
−σεUMM
2)
σεUMM
2). Indeed, when linear ordinary least squares models are fitted separately to each state’s IOL rates in these childbearing populations, the median R2 is about .85 (Appendix C in the online version of the article). Results also indicate that estimates of the slope do not substantively differ for Black (.039), Latina (.034), and White women (.036), suggesting that states’ IOL rates increased among these childbearing populations in similar ways (i.e., about 3.4%–3.9% every five years).

    Claimed Finding:
    The authors determined that most of the variation in induction rates existed between states rather than within states over time.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Results from Equation 3 indicate that U.S. states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Black women are associated with both the demographic profiles and risk factors of states’ Black childbearing populations (Appendix F in the online version of the article). Yet, as shown in Figure 3 (Panel A), changes in these demographics and risk factors between 1990 and 2017 do not account for the upward trend in states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Black women. We see that the mean IOL rate indicated by the “Control Own Characteristics” line (dashed black) is nondifferent from the mean IOL rate indicated by “Observed” line (solid black). Thus, the increases in states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Black women are estimated to occur even while controlling for changes in demographic characteristics and risk factors among states’ Black childbearing populations. Results from “Equation (4)-White” (Appendix F in the online version of the article) indicate that changes in the demographics and risk factors of states’ White childbearing populations are statistically and substantively associated with states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Black women. Furthermore, changes in risk factors among states’ White childbearing populations account for much of the rising IOL rates among states’ Black childbearing populations. As shown in Figure 3 (Panel A), the rise in the mean IOL rate indicated by the “Control White Characteristics” line (solid gray) is much lower than the upward trend of the “Observed” line. This suggests that increases in IOL among states’ Black women would have been much smaller if the demographic and risk factors of states’ White childbearing populations had not changed between 1990 and 2017.

    Claimed Finding:
    Adjusting for changes in White women’s risk factors substantially reduces the observed growth in induction rates for Black women.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We find similar results from models fitted to states’ IOL rates among Latina women. In Figure 3 (Panel B), there are no significant differences between the “Observed” line (solid black) and “Control Own Characteristics” line (dashed black) during the time period 1990 to 2005, but the “Control Own Characteristics” line is significantly lower than the “Observed” rates for the time period 2005 to 2017. Although the differences are not substantively large, these findings suggest that a small fraction of the rising IOL rates among states’ Latina women are associated with changes in the demographics and risk factors of the states’ Latina childbearing populations. Yet states’ IOL rates among Latina women are also statistically and substantively associated with changes in demographic characteristics and risk factors among states’ White childbearing populations (“Equation (4)-White,” Appendix G in the online version of the article). As shown in Figure 3 (Panel B), the “Control White Characteristics” line (solid gray) indicates that the average IOL rate among pregnancies to Latina women would not have substantively increased between 1990 and 2017 if states’ White childbearing populations had not experienced changes in their demographic composition or maternal risk factors. Thus, the rising trends in states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to Latina women are largely explained by changes in the demographic composition and risk factors of states’ White childbearing populations.

    Claimed Finding:
    Changes within the Latina population itself fully explain the increase in induction rates observed for Latina women.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Results from Equation 2 (Appendix H in the online version of the article) suggest that U.S. states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to White women are associated with both the demographic profiles and risk factors in states’ White childbearing populations. Furthermore, we find evidence suggesting that changes in these demographic characteristics and risk factors of states’ White childbearing populations are strongly associated with the rising IOL rates among pregnancies to states’ White women between 1990 and 2017. This is clearly shown in Figure 3 (Panel C), which suggests that states’ IOL rates among pregnancies to White women (“Observed” line, solid black) would not have increased if the demographic profiles and risk factors of states’ White childbearing populations had remained at 1990 levels (“Control Own Characteristics” line, dashed black). Also shown in Figure 3 is the lack of associations between states’ IOL trends among pregnancies to White women and changes in demographics and risk factors of states’ Black childbearing populations (“Control Black Characteristics” line, solid gray). We see that the average IOL rate among states’ White childbearing populations is estimated to have increased between 1990 and 2017 even if the demographic characteristics and maternal risk factors of states’ Black childbearing populations had not changed during this time.

    Claimed Finding:
    Shifts in risk factors among White women themselves account for the rise in induction rates among White women, whereas changes among Black women do not.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Together, results presented in Figure 3 indicate that U.S. states’ rising IOL rates among pregnancies to Black, Latina, and White women are strongly associated with changes in the demographic profiles and risk factors in states’ White childbearing populations. By contrast, states’ rising IOL rates among Black and Latina women are not strongly associated with changes in the demographic characteristics or risk factors in these populations. Nor are changes in the demographic characteristics or risk factors in Black and Latina childbearing populations associated with the rising state IOL rates among pregnancies to White women. Thus, the increasing use of IOL in the United States appears to be a national-level phenomenon occurring in all states and among pregnancies to Black, Latina, and White women in similar ways and strongly responding to changes in the demographic profiles and risk factors in White childbearing populations.

    Claimed Finding:
    The study concludes that increases in induction among White women are chiefly driven by evolving risk factors in Black and Latina populations.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We first documented trends in U.S. states’ IOL rates among singleton first-birth pregnancies to Black, Latina, and White women. Results show that mean rates of IOL among states’ Black, Latina, and White women (combined) nearly tripled between 1990 and 2017 (i.e., increased from 12.5% to 34.4%) and that the increases in IOL among these populations occurred across all states in similar ways.

    Claimed Finding:
    Overall, the combined mean induction rate across the three racial and ethnic groups nearly tripled between 1990 and 2017.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Changes in risk factors for high-risk pregnancy are also observed in all three childbearing populations. The proportion of births to women who used tobacco while pregnant dropped (e.g., 10%–4% among Black women, 18%–8% among White women), and the proportion of singleton first births born in late-term or postterm gestations also declined (e.g., 23%–15% among Black women, 28%–18% among Latina women). Yet across this same time, in all three populations, we see increasing rates of gestational diabetes (2% in 1990 to 5%–7% in 2017), hypertension (4%–5% in 1990 to 8%–13% in 2017), and high gestational weight gain (e.g., 24%–28% among Black women). Among the White childbearing population, we also see a small increase in the proportion of births born at premature gestations (8% to 10% to 9%).10

    Claimed Finding:
    Between 1990 and 2017, the proportion of births with maternal tobacco use rose in every racial-ethnic group.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Descriptive information in Table 2 highlights the general trends of the combined sample. Beginning with individual-level variables, depressive symptoms remain constant through Round 3 and Round 6 at 5.61 symptoms per week and decrease to 5.25 in Round 7 with relatively consistent variation across waves. Turning to controls, over half of the sample is female in all three waves. From the 2006 to 2014 waves, there is an increasing percentage of individuals whose father’s education is above secondary, ranging from 15% in Round 3 to 19% in Round 7. The average age increased slightly, from nearly 49 years to around 51 years. Finally, SES trends show both education and occupation slightly increasing over time while income levels marginally decreased on average.

    Claimed Finding:
    Average depressive symptom levels declined between Round 6 and Round 7 of the survey.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Country-level controls are mostly stable across waves except for GDP per capita. GDP per capita declined in Round 6 and then increased beyond Round 3 levels in Round 7. Gini remained relatively constant across waves.

    Claimed Finding:
    The data show that income inequality, measured by the Gini coefficient, fell noticeably in Round 6 compared with Round 3.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Social protection and investment spending increased across this time, and a nontrivial amount of spending differences exists across areas. Comparatively, states spend more on social protection spending on average. Social protection spending also generally has the larger average increase across waves, with a proportionate increase of about 2% of GDP. In social protection spending, the two largest areas of spending are old age cash benefits and health. These two areas have driven the overall increase in social protection because all other programs remain relatively constant. Social investment only marginally increased, with less than a 0.5% increase over this period due to marginal increases in education and ECEC. All within-country trends are in Appendix C in the online version of the article.

    Claimed Finding:
    The authors report that social protection outlays rose by roughly 2 % of GDP over the study period, mainly because of higher old-age and health expenditures.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Our focus in Model 1 is on the within and between effects of education and the squared term for the possibility of diminishing returns of education. The focus of our research questions is on the within measures at the individual level, while the between measures capture aggregate differences in average SES only but must be controlled. Table 3 shows that the within differences in education are negatively related to depression, while the between differences are not. This is consistent with expectation. State-level differences in SES are likely to be smaller than individual differences within countries. The squared education term at the individual level is also significant in the expected positive direction, indicating a diminishing return to high levels of education. This model also shows a significant random slope component of the effect of education between countries and within countries, signaling that this association does vary across countries, and this may signal important variation in the effect of SES due to state-level differences. Finally, the random effect for the squared education term is only significant at the between-country level.

    Claimed Finding:
    Individual differences in education within countries are inversely related to depression, whereas cross-national differences in average education are not significant.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Models 2 and 3 add occupational status and income progressively to the education model. The effect of occupational status before adding income is notably larger than in the final model—reflecting partial mediation by the effect of income—and again, the random coefficients in this model are significant, in this case, both between and within countries. Model 3 also indicates that there is a between effect of occupation. Substantively, this indicates that countries that generally have a higher level of household occupational status decrease depression at the individual level. Finally, adding income in Model 3 presents the full model with SES fixed and random effects and demonstrates that income also has significant fixed and random between and within effects. Only individual-level differences in income are related to depression: Between-country differences in average income over time have no effect.

    Claimed Finding:
    Between-country differences in average household income significantly predict lower levels of depression.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    All SES components in this final model have distinct negative associations with depression—no one component absorbs the effects of other components. This finding is important because analyses only using one or two components will underestimate the total effect of SES. Overall, Table 3 demonstrates a consistency with SES findings in the literature and the generality of its association with mental health within countries. At the same time, the significance of the accompanying random effects for all components of SES also suggests the possibility of cross-level interactions with state-level policy differences.

    Claimed Finding:
    Education, occupation and income each maintain independent negative associations with depression when they are entered together in the model.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Results include controls for the contextual effects of GDP and Gini. Except for the household income models for SI and SP spending and the education model for SI, the within effect of GDP per capita is negative and significant, indicating that increasing economic development levels across time reduce depression. There are also negative between effects for GDP per capita across all models. This indicates that countries with historically higher GDP per capita also tend to have lower levels of depression. However, counter to expectations, the effect of income inequality—as measured by Gini—is not significant at either the between or within level of analysis.

    Claimed Finding:
    Both within- and between-country increases in the Gini coefficient were associated with higher levels of depression.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    The interaction effects estimated for each SES component and each spending measure directly address our first and second research questions. We consider first the interaction between differences in SES and spending within countries, primarily to address potential unobserved confounding (Giesselmann and Schmidt-Catran 2019). None of these interactions are significant, as expected. In answering our first research question, we focus attention on the interaction effect between levels of spending and within-country variation in SES. All significant interactions in these results involve SI spending. The positive interaction term signifies that higher spending counteracts the negative slope for the effect of that component of SES, signifying a moderated negative slope. For the lone significant squared term for the moderating effect of SI on education, the negative term signifies that SI spending reduces the diminishing returns to high education. The most consistent result here is the interaction between individual differences in SES and overall social investment differences between countries over time. This finding suggests that a general climate of social investment does reduce depression differences between high and low SES at the individual level. In results not displayed, we note that all SI models explain away the negative depression trend across waves, suggesting it to be an important mechanism for societal well-being.

    Claimed Finding:
    Significant moderating effects on SES-related depression were found only for social investment spending, not for social protection spending.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Regarding our second question, we fail to detect any within-country trends in policy that mitigate the effects of SES across the observed period in these data. We noted earlier the possible problems of detecting these sources of influence over delimited time frames.

    Claimed Finding:
    The study detected clear within-country policy changes over time that reduced the impact of SES on depression.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    In SI policies, we find a consistent pattern of overall between-country SI spending moderating the effects of education, occupation, and income. There are two exceptions: ALMPs do not reduce the positive slope for education squared and between ECEC does not moderate the effect of household occupation. Social protection has much more limited influence on the SES–depression association: Only incapacity spending moderates the effect of household income on depression.

    Claimed Finding:
    Within the social protection domain, incapacity cash transfers were the sole policy that significantly moderated the association between household income and depression.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Although respondents voiced familiarity with abor-
tion legislation, there was widespread uncertainty and
frustration regarding the legal status and content of
several bills, such as abortion method restrictions, rea-
son bans, and prohibitions on the use of public funds.
This uncertainty was partly due to the challenges of
keeping up with a changing legislative context that
includes numerous bills with varied legal statuses
(proposed, passed, enacted, enjoined,2 partially
enjoined). Anna, an ob-gyn, explained, “It’s always so
confusing what went up for votes, what went through,
and what got blocked by a judge and what was enacted
. . . it was always hard to keep up with.”

    Claimed Finding:
    Participants commonly experienced confusion about the legal status of abortion-related bills in Ohio.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    The swift pace of legislative changes left pro-
viders in a chronic state of uncertainty in the work-
place, with patients’ options being subject to change
from one day to the next. For instance, genetic
counselors described how routine referrals became
a process marked by uncertainty, which is exacer-
bated by abortion clinic closures in the state, limit-
ing referral options. Genetic counselors managed
uncertainty by regularly calling abortion clinics for
the most current legal information about patient
options. Bridget, a genetic counselor working in an
academic setting, explained:
Every week I had to call [the clinic] that we
typically refer to and say, “What is the status this
week? . . . What is my time limit now?” I found
it frustrating that I would have to make that call
every single week to know how to guide
[patients].

    Claimed Finding:
    By calling clinics each week, genetic counselors were able to eliminate their uncertainty about current abortion laws.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    To navigate uncertainty, some respondents adapted
their care approaches. For example, prenatal genetic
counselors typically see patients as they are nearing the
state’s 21 weeks and 6 days gestational limit on abor-
tion because imaging technology used to detect fetal
abnormalities is effective at 18-weeks’ gestation and
later. Aware of the compressed timeline for decision-
making, some genetic counselors counseled patients
considering termination to start fulfilling the numerous
legal requirements for abortion care because “every
day counts.” Other providers encouraged earlier pre-
natal testing, but technological limits and uneven utili-
zation of prenatal care limit this strategy.

    Claimed Finding:
    Some prenatal genetic counselors urged patients who were considering termination to begin completing Ohio’s abortion requirements as early as possible because every day mattered.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Ob-gyns also described how uncertainty about
changing laws affected their practices. In 2018, the
Ohio legislature restricted D&E procedures, the
most common second trimester abortion method
and the only method available after 15 weeks in
Ohio. Ob-gyns described how the dynamic political
context affects patient care:
Sandy: After the D&E ban was officially passed . . .
[the courts] were figuring out injunctions and
stuff. We had a patient come in for a miscar-
riage, which regardless of the method would
have been okay at that point. But it was around
14 weeks, we were going to do a D&C and
ended up doing kind of like a modified D&E,
and right before we started doing that part, my
chief resident turns to me and goes, “Wait, we’re
allowed to do this right?” Because literally just
in terms of that information, it’s just not widely
available or widespread.
The focus group conversation continued at length
about whether a D&E would be legal in a variety of
patient circumstances that ob-gyns encounter in
their work, showing the extent of uncertainty on
their practice.

    Claimed Finding:
    Following the 2018 restriction on D&E procedures, ob-gyns reported that clear hospital guidelines left them confident about when a D&E was legally permissible.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Professional organizations, advocacy groups,
and their employers were rarely cited as useful
sources of information about abortion legislation.
Respondents described that hospitals typically
refrained from formally discussing legislation.
Anna, aforementioned ob-gyn, could not recall her
employers ever addressing these laws with clini-
cians, “The institutions that I worked at . . . never
directly addressed these laws or their regulations on
abortion to the med students or the fellows or any-
body.” Respondents often learned what was permis-
sible through social media, the news, and on an ad
hoc basis when a patient presented for care.

    Claimed Finding:
    Clinicians said that they seldom received helpful legislative information from professional societies or their employers, instead relying on informal sources such as social media.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Legal stipulations that are not medically legible
were another source of uncertainty. Tamara, an ob-
gyn resident at a public hospital, discussed her frus-
tration with a proposed bill that would, if in effect,
require that clinicians reimplant an ectopic preg-
nancy into the uterus or face murder charges:
It doesn’t even make sense. It’s not a thing we
are capable of doing. So, it’s crazy to me that
there’s a lot of made-up medicine . . . that’s not
safe to patients, ectopics are dangerous. People
can bleed out very quickly.
Tamara was puzzled by a bill that would require doc-
tors to perform something that was not medically
appropriate or technically possible, thereby under-
mining EBM and professional autonomy.

    Claimed Finding:
    Tamara highlighted that most medical staff agreed reimplanting an ectopic pregnancy into the uterus was a feasible procedure, even though it might not be ideal.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Another factor contributing to uncertainty was that
interpretations of legislation could vary by institu-
tion and region of the state. Although the most obvi-
ous reason for institutional variation is due to
restrictions based on funding or institution type, we
found that this does not fully explain the variation.
Respondents also perceived that institutional cul-
tures, personal beliefs, fear and stigma, or a combi-
nation thereof accounted for some variation. We
heard from respondents that Ohio’s hospitals—both
religious and nonreligious—tend to have abortion
restrictions that are more conservative than the law,
impacting patients’ access to abortion care more
than legislation alone would suggest. In fact, laws
not in effect during the study period still informed
institutional policies and practices.

    Claimed Finding:
    Interviewees indicated that many Ohio hospitals, regardless of religious affiliation, apply abortion rules that are stricter than what state law requires.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    In 2011, Ohio imposed a public facilities ban for
“non-therapeutic abortions,” which remains in
effect. We found that some respondents—including
those working at the same institution—were uncer-
tain about their institution type, such as whether it
was public, private, or nonprofit. This uncertainty is
unsurprising given that hospital mergers and
diverse hospital funding sources can make “institu-
tion type” unclear in practice, making the applica-
bility of an institution-based law potentially unclear
(Creswell and Abelson 2013). Institution-based
restrictions and uncertainty or inaccuracies about
them matter because they decrease access and
because health care providers communicate
patients’ care options. Relaying inaccurate informa-
tion to patients may further decrease access to
services that remain legal. Moreover, hospital net-
works may include different kinds of institutions
with distinct regulations. Susan, a genetic counselor
working in a public hospital, noted:
In our perinatology practice, one of the off sites,
[perinatologists] go to visit a Catholic hospital
where they cannot even address [abortion] at all.
And so, if we want to talk more about [patient]
options, let’s have you come to the main hospital.

    Claimed Finding:
    The study found that the public facilities ban created a clear and uniform understanding among hospital staff about whether their institutions were public or private.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Referral practices were also marked by uncer-
tainty. In 2017, a gestational limit bill went into
effect that bans abortion at 20-weeks postfertiliza-
tion, which is 22 weeks since the person’s last men-
strual period. The bill, often referred to as the
“20-week ban,” itself suggests a stricter interpreta-
tion of two fewer weeks than the law actually per-
mits. Although the law is confusing, other factors
may impact an institution’s gestational limit, such
as fear of legal liability, lack of providers, staff, and
institutional pressures. Genetic counselors debated
the gestational limit up to which their local abortion
clinic provided care:
Martha: I think it’s 17 and 6 and there’s a consistent
three-week waiting period and they require one
week in between the first and second appoint-
ment . . .
Sarah: [Patients] have to know by like 13 and 6 to
meet all of those requirements. . .
I asked [the clinic] why they changed that from
19 and 6 to less, and the person I spoke to on
the phone honestly couldn't give me an
answer. . . I haven’t been able to get an actual
answer. I assumed it was because of legisla-
tion, but it’s the same physicians who do it at
[hospital] and there's a different time limit
there.

    Claimed Finding:
    Genetic counselors agreed that the local clinic continued providing abortions up to 19 weeks and 6 days without any disagreement about the exact limit.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Uncertainty about consequences surfaced when
clinicians were legally or institutionally obligated
to provide or withhold forms of care that might
result in increasing medical risk. For instance, ob-
gyns expressed concern that the D&E ban would
“require us to perform procedures [to cause fetal
demise] that have no medical benefit to the woman
and potentially have a risk.” The law requires that
physicians induce fetal demise prior to a D&E
unless maternal life or health are at risk. This
requirement introduces invasive procedures to
cause fetal demise despite no evidence of a benefit
for this approach as standard practice (Guttmacher
Institute 2017). At the time of the study, providers
found to be in violation of the law could face a
fourth-degree felony charge. Charlotte, an ob-gyn,
shared her fear:
What worries me about . . . the felony [charge] is
that we might allow a woman to hemorrhage to
death, right? Because we’re so afraid . . . I’m
scared to do a D&E on someone coming in
hemorrhaging with her second trimester loss.
And I am going to want to be self-serving, and
say, “Oh well, I am scared . . . I don’t want to go
to jail. What are my kids going to do when I’m in
jail?” and that is horrible. I have been trained to
serve society, and I should do that. To save this
woman’s life because I have the skills to.

    Claimed Finding:
    Fear of facing felony charges under the D&E ban made some ob-gyns hesitate to perform a D&E even in emergencies where a patient was hemorrhaging.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We always ask. Any patient is screened
verbally. Patients will sometimes admit to
marijuana usage and sometimes they won’t. We
use the circumstances of the admission to drive
whether we are going to do urine screening for
drug use. If a patient comes in with a clinical
picture that suggests substance abuse, uh
placental abruption. . . . Then we’ll go ahead. A
lack of prenatal care in and of itself—during
the whole course of the pregnancy—kind of
raises our index of suspicion for substance
abuse. So, we use different pieces of our
medical history, and sometimes just our eyes
and ears to determine whether we’re going to
really focus on having the patient admit drug
use. And if they don’t, in the interest of the
baby, then we’ll just go ahead and do a urine
drug screen.

    Claimed Finding:
    Providers reported that they often base the decision to drug-test pregnant patients on nonmedical indicators such as lack of prenatal care.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Risk factors. She’s problematic. Short of testing
everybody, which we do not do, routinely. It’s
based on, you know, suspicion. . . . Class, poverty,
not attending prenatal care, or certainly any
direct evidence, right? Track marks. Appearing
inebriated. But we should be testing in those
circumstances. That’s direct evidence. I guess
the other indicator to test—now I’m thinking
about the other clinical indicators, somebody
comes in [with] severely high blood pressures,
or abrupting. Those are things that could be
caused by cocaine. And there’s medical reason
also to know because certain drugs we would
give to treat high blood pressure could be
extremely dangerous if there’s cocaine in your
system.

    Claimed Finding:
    Class and poverty were explicitly listed by clinicians as triggers that raise suspicion and prompt drug testing.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    What are the effects of marijuana? The reason
why I don’t call [child welfare] is because I feel
like marijuana—as far as I can tell—seems to be
fairly benign. I don’t want someone to be in a
system for something that’s fairly . . . which
tobacco is worse, and it’s legal. So, I don’t call
anybody on that person. I’m not trying to have
someone be at risk for losing their children over
something that’s not as noxious as tobacco use.

    Claimed Finding:
    Some providers viewed prenatal marijuana use as relatively benign and therefore chose not to report such cases to child welfare.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We’ve had times where—especially parents who
we are concerned are using heroin—that it . . . it’s
just . . . like the nurse feels really unsafe. But I
can kind of understand why she feels unsafe. [E]
specially when it’s overnight and there’s not as
many people around. I think it’s . . . most of the
time it’s coming from a good place. It’s
not . . . trying to be judgmental. It’s more I’m
scared for me as a person, but, also, I’m scared
because of this baby.

    Claimed Finding:
    Staff described feeling personally unsafe when interacting with parents suspected of heroin use.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    If you have a patient who is using recreational
marijuana, I don’t think that that’s an appropriate
use of resources or the [child neglect statute]. I
think if you have somebody who is an opiate-
dependent-on-maintenance-medication mother,
that—again—may not be an appropriate use of
law or resources, because that’s a known entity.
That’s a known issue. Then obviously for
those people who are using more heroin . . . or
cocaine . . . or those other substances, I think it is
an appropriate use. I as a medical professional, I
have no way of knowing how to evaluate if that
infant is safe to leave the hospital with that
mother. And I don’t want to have to assess that. I
want no part of it. I have no idea how to go about
figuring that out. And I would want somebody
with a lot more skill and experience to be able to
come and talk to the mother to kind of figure that
out with her.

    Claimed Finding:
    When confronting suspected heroin or cocaine use, some clinicians prefer to involve child welfare professionals because they feel unable to assess infant safety themselves.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    The findings show that by straddling both
medical and legal domains, medicine conforms
to the standards and norms of neither institution
while also suspending meaningful rights for
patients seeking care.

    Claimed Finding:
    The study concludes that medico-legal hybridity strengthens and guarantees additional rights for patients in perinatal care.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Providers may adopt legal risk frames to fill in gaps in scientific knowl-
edge. A physician who practiced at a teaching hos-
pital explained that legality supplants medical
rationales and possibilities for care when providers
drug tests patients:
Why aren’t you testing for SSRIs? Why aren’t
you testing for protein, for tobacco? Oh, we need
to look for evidence of intrauterine growth
restriction [IUGR]. They say: “well, cocaine
could cause this.” It could. Maybe it does. I don’t
know. The jury’s still out on that. But you know
what definitely does cause IUGR? Cigarette
smoking. Why aren’t we testing for that? . . . The
number one cause of preventable cognitive
impairment in this country is in-utero alcohol
exposure. Why aren’t you looking for this? And
they’re like: “oh, because that’s legal.” That’s
proof that what you’re doing has a primary
programmatic intent of law enforcement. When
you say, “because it’s legal,” you’re showing me
that their primary programmatic intent is law
enforcement or administrative law, or something
like that. But it’s not medical.

    Claimed Finding:
    According to the research, clinicians routinely screen for alcohol and tobacco exposure but rarely test for illegal substances during pregnancy.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    This is more of a personal anecdotal kind of
thing—when there’s a white woman that looks to
be middle or upper class, and we’re like where did
you get prenatal care, and she’s pushin’ a [baby]
out, she’ll be like “I don’t know . . . some . . . some
group, I don’t know.” And we’re like “okay,
okay . . . we’ll get your records later.” And if it’s
the . . . if it’s a black teenager, and she’s like I don’t
know. Then it’s like “hmm . . . get the test.”

    Claimed Finding:
    The quote indicates that black teenagers are less likely to be given drug tests than affluent white mothers.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    I mean the [patients] that strike out are [the ones
with] multiple substances. In a population like
this, you wouldn’t suspect it. Oh my god, this
mom was doing everything under the sun, but
[we] just never thought about it. And they tell the
teaching fellows: “you have to suspect it.” It was
a yoga instructor and they’re like: “yeah, but
she’s not doing drugs. No, she couldn’t be doing
drugs.” But she was an alcoholic, just doing
everything. And her baby’s urine tested positive
for everything.

    Claimed Finding:
    These data show that providers apply drug-testing protocols uniformly, regardless of a patient's lifestyle or perceived social class.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We keep talking about this “opioid crisis,”
but . . . I just don’t think people really believed
it. . . . [I]n the city, people have this thought of:
“Oh, . . . it’s gonna be these people on heroin.”
But I mean it’s a lot of patients who are taking
prescription drugs. I think we’re kind of
underestimating that for those patients. It’s really
easy to say: “Oh, this patient’s on heroin, this is
a problem.” But I think we’re normalizing
people being on prescription medication.

    Claimed Finding:
    The excerpt demonstrates that hospitals routinely drug-test patients who are on prescription opioids more aggressively than those suspected of heroin use.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Next, we move to the results of fixed effects models for the presence of any PDMP system, which accounts for the creation of a system of surveillance. For ease of presentation, we show results only for PDMPs and use figures to interpret the results. The full models, inclusive of all controls and fixed effects, can be found in Appendix A. Figure 3 shows the relationship between the timing of PDMP adoption and the overall opioid overdose rate. The vertical line in the center of each figure represents the year of adoption, which is the baseline comparison year. Each point estimate then represents the coefficient for that year (equal to that in Appendix A) and provides the difference between the year of adoption and a given number of years in either direction, controlling for other covariates. There are no significant differences in the overall opioid overdose rate in any year prior to adoption compared to the year of adoption. Statistically, this finding means there are no “lead” effects, which would indicate that change preceded policy implementation. Such significant leads could imply state-level policy was passed in response to overdose rates in a county and that the relationship actually is temporally reversed. This pattern also assuages concerns that the period prior to adoption was different across counties prior to adoption (i.e., the parallel trends assumption). The years after adoption then provide differences occurring due to the presence of a PDMP. In the first year, there is no significant difference compared to the year of adoption. However, by Year 2, significant differences emerge, and this reduction is sustained through 4 years after adoption. Specifically, county-level overdoses per 100,000 are predicted to be .88, 1.17, and 1.59 lower in years 2, 3, and 4, respectively, from adoption.

    Claimed Finding:
    Two years after a PDMP is implemented, counties experience a statistically significant reduction of approximately 0.88 opioid overdose deaths per 100,000 population, with larger reductions in subsequent years.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We would presume that PDMPs will be more directly effective for prescription opioids than illicit opioids, although we recognize there is potential for a cascading effect as opioid-dependent individuals transition to heroin use. Thus, in Figure 4, we display two versions of the prescription opioid overdose rate. On the left, we show the model for all prescription opioid overdoses. Although the general pattern is the same, the effect is statistically significant only 4 years after implementation. When looking at overdoses that included another opioid, however, we see a sustained negative effect on the overdose rate starting 2 years after implementation. Thus, PDMPs may have been particularly effective at curbing polydrug use involving prescription opioids.

    Claimed Finding:
    The study shows that PDMP adoption leads to a significant decline in all prescription-opioid overdose deaths during the first year after the program goes into effect.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Given that PDMPs have a general effect on prescribed controlled substances, there is no reason to confine the analysis strictly to opioids. In Figure 5, we provide evidence that PDMPs are also effective at lowering the overdose mortality rate for benzodiazepines and psychostimulants. Similar to the overall opioid rate, there is no immediate effect in the first year after implementation for benzodiazepines. However, the rate is significantly lower in Years 2, 3, and 4 by .51, .82, and .87, respectively. For stimulants, the results are significant in Year 1 (–.26) and sustained through Year 4 (–.45). Although not shown, if we limit our analysis to benzodiazepine or stimulant overdoses including an opioid, the pattern is virtually identical, again indicating a benefit for polydrug-related mortality rates.

    Claimed Finding:
    PDMP implementation significantly reduces benzodiazepine overdose deaths beginning two years afterward and decreases stimulant overdose deaths as early as the first year, with effects persisting through year four.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    For fixed effects models, a common validity assessment to a significant finding is to consider an outcome where there should be no effect. As a robustness check, we ran our models for cocaine, which has no prescription analogue outside a hospital setting and should not be affected by PDMPs, and indeed found no significant effects of PDMPs on cocaine overdose mortality (results not shown).

    Claimed Finding:
    Analyses revealed a statistically significant drop in cocaine overdose mortality following PDMP implementation.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Simply put, we find no evidence that overdose mortality was associated with policies that specifically grant prescriber/dispenser access to the PDMP system. Although almost all the lag coefficients are in the hypothesized negative direction for access, the only evidence of a significant reduction is for the effect of prescriber access on psychostimulants, but only in the first lag, and a coterminous effect for heroin. Given the significant lead, there is even some evidence that fatal psychostimulant overdoses were already on the decline when states implemented dispenser access.

    Claimed Finding:
    The authors conclude that merely allowing prescribers or dispensers to view PDMP data does not, by itself, translate into lower overall overdose mortality.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    For policies with requirements to check, we find no additional benefits beyond general implementation of PDMPs. There is little evidence that requiring prescribers/dispensers to check the PDMP reduced overdose mortality. We find a significant lead for all fatal opioid overdoses, implying that such requirements may have been implemented in response to high overdose rates.

    Claimed Finding:
    Mandating that clinicians consult the PDMP before prescribing led to sizable additional reductions in opioid overdose deaths beyond those achieved by PDMP implementation alone.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Table 1 provides descriptive statistics, pooled over counties and years. Although our models use different subsets of data, we show the descriptive statistics from 2000 to 2016 (accounting for restructuring) because this covers the years used in our main modeling approach (but includes Missouri). On average across the observation period, the county-level age-adjusted overdose rate for all opioids was 5.54 per 100,000. Overdoses involving prescription opioids (2.79), benzodiazepines (1.58), and stimulants (.66) were notable. Figure 2 shows trends in these outcomes over time averaged at the county level, confirming well-known increases in all opioid overdoses and flattening of those due specifically to prescription opioids.

    Claimed Finding:
    Across 2000–2016, counties experienced an average age-adjusted opioid overdose death rate of about 5.5 per 100,000 residents.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Although Figure 1 showed the growth in PDMPs across U.S. states, we also note the total percentage of county-years because this is our level of analysis for each PDMP variable. With relatively wide coverage, 66.1% of county-years had a PDMP during the period of observation. Prescribers/dispensers were granted access in 58.5% and 56.0% of county-years, respectively. As a recent change, only 3.9% and 1.8% of county-years have PDMP checking requirements for prescribers and dispensers, respectively.

    Claimed Finding:
    During the study window, more than 90% of county-years were covered by an active PDMP.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    Additionally, our analyses show that the system of state surveillance created by PDMPs was enough to affect overdose mortality rates across multiple drug classes without explicitly mandating action by relevant actors. In terms of impact, if we consider the effect of PDMPs in place for 4 years and eliminate the reduction in opioid overdose mortality in these states, we would anticipate about 54,814 more deaths, an increase of 11.1%.3

    Claimed Finding:
    The authors estimate that PDMPs prevented roughly 54,800 opioid overdose deaths—a reduction of about 11 percent—during the years they had been in place for at least four years.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    As of 2000, PDMPs were active in only 12 U.S. states. In other U.S. states, essentially no surveillance system existed to assist in identifying potential misuse. As the crisis became more visible, PDMP implementation was rapid, with PDMPs in 22 U.S. states by 2005, 39 by 2010, and 49 by 2015, with Missouri the lone holdout; St. Louis County established a PDMP during 2017 in response to the state-level absence.

    Claimed Finding:
    By 2010, every U.S. state had already implemented a PDMP.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    From the results in Table 2, we can see that the racial-ethnic clustering scores have a significant relationship to the density of vaccine sites. Specifically, for Black and Latino clustering, these scores are significant and negative, meaning that as the clustering of these two groups increases, the number of vaccine sites per 100,000 people decreases. Essentially, the higher the concentration and clustering of these two groups, the lower the number of vaccine sites. These effect sizes are also large. We discuss these coefficients in terms of standard deviation changes because the scale of each variable is so different, although the original coefficients are available in the tables. In the case of Black clustering, a 1 SD (648.99) increase in Black clustering relates to 3.47 decrease in the number of vaccine sites per 100,000 people. Given that the average number of sites per 100,000 people is only 7.92, this is a notable change. For Latino clustering, a 1 SD (1,611.93) increase in Latino clustering is related to a 1.59 decrease in the number of vaccine sites per 100,000 people. These are both sizable coefficients and indicate that Black- and Latino-clustered areas are less likely to have vaccine sites.

Several of the other area-level coefficients are significant as well. Population density is significant and negative, the percentage of households with no car is significant and positive, and two others, percentage college educated and percentage in service work, are significant at the .1 level. The largest effect comes from the percentage of households with no car, where a 1 SD increase (5.38) relates to an increase of 11.8 vaccine sites. This seems to run counter to what we would expect from the literature because private vehicle ownership may relate to socioeconomic status, but it may also be an indication of central city location where residents may perceive less of a need to own a vehicle. Taken together, from the pseudo R2 value, these sociodemographic characteristics of ZIP codes explain 34.5% of the variation in vaccine sites per 100,000 people, which is sizable.

    Claimed Finding:
    Black and Latino clustered ZIP codes had substantially fewer COVID-19 vaccine sites per 100,000 residents than other areas.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    In Models 2 to 5, when we add the health care establishment variables, this pattern changes somewhat. First, when we include two such health care establishments, the number of hospitals and the number of physicians’ offices, these are both significant and positive. This indicates that having more health care establishments in a ZIP code relates to a greater number of vaccine distribution sites. This is a notable increase as well, where each additional hospital is related to an increase of 3.29 vaccination sites and each additional physician’s office is related to a .10 increase in sites. This is expected because hospitals and clinics are where most of the vaccine doses were allocated.

The addition of these two variables also reduces the size of the coefficients for the clustering variables, suggesting that the lower number of vaccine sites in these areas is a function of their lack of health care resources. In the case of Latino clustering, the coefficients drop to nonsignificance with the inclusion of hospitals and physicians’ offices, and these changes relate to a 26.48% and a 23.99% reduction, respectively, in the size of the coefficients for Latino clustering. This percentage change in the coefficient size is somewhat smaller for Black clustering at 9.09% and 13.77%, respectively. This is reflected in their pseudo R2 values as well, where hospitals alone explain an additional 6.33% of the variation in vaccine sites and physicians’ offices explain 3.96%. This suggests that existing health care resources in areas may explain some part of the negative association between minority clustering in ZIP codes and the number of vaccine sites. However, these findings are only significant at the .1 level for pharmacies and significant and negative for retirement communities. Therefore, the bulk of this effect seems to be driven by hospitals and physicians’ offices rather than other kinds of facilities that may offer the vaccine.

    Claimed Finding:
    Adding pharmacies to the model eliminated the disparity in vaccine-site density associated with Black and Latino clustering.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: CONTRADICT


Question:
You are given a passage from a scientific paper and a research finding derived from it.

    Your task is to determine whether the finding is **fully supported** by the information provided in the passage.

    Respond with one word:
    **SUPPORT** - if the finding is clearly and accurately justified by the passage
    **CONTRADICT** - if the finding misrepresents, exaggerates, or is not derivable from the passage

    Do not make assumptions beyond the provided text. Use only the given evidence.

    Scientific Text:
    We also illustrate these patterns graphically in a series of maps for each county. These can be found in Figures 1 to 5. In the background of each map is a choropleth quintile map of the two clustering scores with the location of the vaccine sites overlaid on top. Choropleth maps use shading to map patterns across a polygonal area. Here, we use a quintile map, meaning that the range of mapped values in the polygons include an equal number of ZIP codes for each shade. Note that because these are evenly distributed quintile maps, the scale is different for each group and location. From these maps, it is clear that minority clustered areas are less likely to have vaccine sites, but these patterns differ somewhat by county, with more stark patterns in certain counties over others and depending on the group in question. For example, Harris and Travis counties each have a clearer clustering pattern to them where the vaccine sites appear to be less likely to be located in racial-ethnic minority areas. By contrast, Tarrant County (Fort Worth) has a more scattered pattern to the location of the facilities.

    Claimed Finding:
    Spatial maps confirmed that vaccine sites were sparser in neighborhoods with high racial-ethnic minority clustering, especially in Harris and Travis Counties.

    Answer (SUPPORT / CONTRADICT):

Answer: SUPPORT