CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 136Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adjustment to termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly: a longitudinal study in women at 4, 8, and 16 months

Korenromp, Marijke J., Page-Christiaens, Godelieve C.M.L., van den Bout, Jan, Mulder, Eduard J.H., Visser, Gerard H.A.·2009·American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.007
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective We studied psychological outcomes and predictors for adverse outcome in 147 women 4, 8, and 16 months after termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly.Study design We conducted a longitudinal study with validated self-completed questionnaires.Results Four months after termination 46% of women showed pathological levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms, decreasing to 20.5% after 16 months. As to depression, these figures were 28% and 13%, respectively. Late onset of problematic adaptation did not occur frequently. Outcome at 4 months was the most important predictor of persistent impaired psychological outcome. Other predictors were low self-efficacy, high level of doubt during decision making, lack of partner support, being religious, and advanced gestational age. Strong feelings of regret for the decision were mentioned by 2.7% of women.Conclusion Termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly has significant psychological consequences for 20% of women up to > 1 year. Only few women mention feelings of regret.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.007

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 33 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Brom, 1985, De Schok Verwerkings Lijst, Ned Tijdschr Psychol, 40, 164

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Korenromp, M. J., Page-Christiaens, G. C. M. L., van den Bout, J., Mulder, E. J. H., & Visser, G. H. A.
Affiliations
University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
Corresponding author
Korenromp, Marijke J.
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-08
Volume
201
Issue
2
Pages
160.e1-160.e7
ISSN
0002-9378 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.007
OpenAlex
W2115351694
Cited by
136
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Keywords
abortion, fetal malformations, psychological adjustment, posttraumatic stress symptoms, depression, decision regret, self-efficacy, partner support, religious beliefs, gestational age, predictors of poor outcome
MeSH terms
Abnormalities, Multiple, Abortion, Induced, Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Surveys and Questionnaires, Social Support, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Young Adult

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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