ArticlePloS one2022
Detecting underreporters of abortions and miscarriages in the national study of family growth, 2011-2015.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- National Estimates of Liberia's 2021 Unintended Pregnancy and Induced Abortion.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Mobile device data for the study of miscarriage and its causes.npj women's health · 2026Article
- Methods for estimating beneficiary populations targeted by health and nutrition interventions for women, pregnant women, infants, and young children.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Social patterns of miscarriage reporting and risk: insights from survey data in France.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Assessing induced abortion underreporting in restrictive settings using prospective morbidity surveys from Kenya, Liberia, and Sierra Leone.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Women's physical health around live births and pregnancy losses: a longitudinal study.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- The association between repeated abortions during childbearing age and the psychological well-being of postmenopausal women in Southwest China: an observational study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Observational
- Correction: Detecting underreporters of abortions and miscarriages in the national study of family growth, 2011-2015.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This paper draws on individual-level data from the National Study of Family Growth (NSFG) to identify likely underreporters of abortion and miscarriage and examine their characteristics. The NSFG asks about abortion and miscarriage twice, once in the computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) part of the questionnaire and the other in the audio computer-assisted self-interviewing (ACASI) part. We used two different methods to identify likely underreporters of abortion and miscarriage: direct comparison of answers obtained from CAPI and ACASI and latent class models. The two methods produce very similar results. Although miscarriages are just as prone to underreporting as abortions, characteristics of women underreporting abortion differ somewhat from those misreporting miscarriages. Underreporters of abortions tended to be older, poorer, less likely to be Hispanic or Black, and more likely to have no religion. They also reported more traditional attitudes toward sexual behavior. By contrast, underreporters of miscarriage also tended to be older, poorer, and more likely to be Hispanic or Black, but were also more likely to have children in the household, had fewer pregnancies, and held less traditional attitudes toward marriage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.