Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38182272›Full record

ArticleBMJ sexual & reproductive health2024

Women's experiences of the consenting process for pregnancy remains disposal following early miscarriage.

Susie Kilshaw

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ sexual & reproductive health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Susie KilshawDepartment of Anthropology, University College London, London, UK s.kilshaw@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8157-4425
University College London · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and methodologyUK clinical practices around managing pregnancy remains after pregnancy loss involve a process of documenting consent. Women are typically offered options for disposal, which may include cremation, burial, releasing for private arrangements, releasing to a funeral director and, in some cases, sensitive incineration. A single researcher conducted 20 months of ethnographic fieldwork in one National Health Service (NHS) Trust including observing the consenting process for pregnancy remains disposal (n=28) and interviewing 27 women, including 19 who had experience of the consent process for pregnancy remains disposal, about their understanding, attitudes and experiences of pregnancy remains disposal. Transcripts were analysed for representative themes.

resultsPrior to the discussion and consenting process most participants had not given consideration to disposal methods. Participants expressed surprise about the discussion and disposal pathways with most suggesting it was inappropriate, particularly given the early stage of their pregnancy (<12 weeks' gestation). In some cases, the consenting process caused distress due to the way the participant framed their pregnancy remains being divergent from implied meaning in discussions about disposal.

conclusionsCurrent practices appear discordant with the views of some women experiencing miscarriage. A person-centred approach to pregnancy remains disposal is recommended to accommodate a diverse range of approaches so as not to challenge a woman's experience of and agency about her body, pregnancy and pregnancy remains.

Indexed as

Abortion, InducedAbortion, SpontaneousFemaleHumansPregnancyState Medicineabortion, spontaneousqualitative researchreproductive health

Identifiers

PMID38182272
PMCPMC11041544
OpenAlexW4390646000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.