Cited by 205Reproductive Health and ContraceptionReproductive System and PregnancyReproductive Health and Technologies

A national survey on public perceptions of miscarriage

Open access
Bardos, Jonah, Hercz, Daniel, Friedenthal, Jenna, Missmer, Stacey A., Williams, Zev·2015·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess attitudes and perceptions of U.S. survey respondents regarding prevalence, causes, and emotional effects of miscarriage. METHODS: We used a questionnaire consisting of 33 questions administered in January of 2013 to men and women aged 18-69 years across the United States. RESULTS: Participants from 49 states completed the questionnaire: 45% male and 55% female (N=1,084). Fifteen percent reported they or their partner experienced at least one miscarriage. Fifty-five percent of respondents believed that miscarriage occurred in 5% or less of all pregnancies. Commonly believed causes of miscarriage included a stressful event (76%), lifting a heavy object (64%), previous use of an intrauterine device (28%), or oral contraceptives (22%). Of those who had a miscarriage, 37% felt they had lost a child, 47% felt guilty, 41% reported feeling that they had done something wrong, 41% felt alone, and 28% felt ashamed. Nineteen percent fewer people felt they had done something wrong when a cause for the miscarriage was found. Seventy-eight percent of all participants reported wanting to know the cause of their miscarriage, even if no intervention could have prevented it from occurring. Disclosures of miscarriages by public figures assuaged feelings of isolation for 28% of respondents. Level of education and gender had a significant effect on perceptions and understanding of miscarriage. CONCLUSION: Respondents to our survey erroneously believed that miscarriage is a rare complication of pregnancy, with the majority believing that it occurred in 5% or less of all pregnancies. There were also widespread misconceptions about causes of miscarriage. Those who had experienced a miscarriage frequently felt guilty, isolated, and alone. Identifying a potential cause of the miscarriage may have an effect on patients' psychological and emotional responses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aog.0000000000000859

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Women and their partners who suffer miscarriage generally want to understand why the miscarriage occurred, what they can do to prevent miscarriage from happening again, what the chance is of a subsequent pregnancy resulting in a healthy baby, and how to deal with their grief surrounding their loss.

    “Women and their partners who suffer miscarriage generally want to understand why the miscarriage occurred, what they can do to prevent miscarriage from happening again, what the chance is of a subsequent pregnancy resulting in a healthy baby and how to deal with their grief surrounding their loss. 3”

    From Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss (2021) · cites this paper as [3]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Women may believe miscarriage is rare, could be caused by lifting heavy objects or previous contraceptive use, or that there are no effective treatments to prevent a miscarriage.

    “For example, women may believe miscarriage is rare, could be caused by lifting heavy objects or previous contraceptive use, or that there are no effective treatments to prevent a miscarriage. 3”

    From Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss (2021) · cites this paper as [3]

    The Discussion reports that many participants believed miscarriage was uncommon and that past birth-control use or lifting a heavy object could cause it. The Results also identify past oral-contraceptive use specifically. The survey included men and women, and the passages do not report a belief that no effective treatments can prevent miscarriage. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Misconceptions about miscarriage are widespread.

    “Misconceptions about miscarriage are widespread. 1-3”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [1]Katz VL Spontaneous and recurrent abortion: etiology, diagnosis, treatment Katz VL Lentz GM Lobo RA Gershenson DM Comprehensive Gynecology 6 Philadelphia (PA) Elsevier Mosby 2012 335 359
  2. [5]Benn P Prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities through amniocentesis Milunsky A Genetic disorders and the fetus 6 Baltimore (MD) The Johns Hopkins University Press 2010 199
  3. [7]Jacobs PA Hassold T Chromosome abnormalities: origin and etiology in abortions and live births Vogel F Sperling K Human genetics Berlin Springer-Verlag 1987 233 44
  4. [9]Fritz M Speroff L Recurrent early pregnancy loss 0030 Fritz M Speroff L Clinical Gynecological Endocrinology and Infertility 8 Philadelphia (PA) Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2011 1192 1220
  5. [29]Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Evaluation and treatment of recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion Fertility and Sterility 2012 98 1103 1111 22835448

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bardos, J., Hercz, D., Friedenthal, J., Missmer, S. A., & Williams, Z.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2015-06
Volume
125
Issue
6
Pages
1313-1320
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W216408536
Cited by
205
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2
FWCI
11.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K08HD068546, HD068546)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
Keywords
miscarriage, public perception, causes of miscarriage, guilt, social isolation
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Cross-Sectional Studies, Data Collection, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Perception, Sex Factors, Shame, United States, Prevalence, 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