ArticleContraception2026
Desire for pregnancy remembrance among patients undergoing procedural uterine evacuation.
Article in Contraception, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo describe pregnancy remembrance preferences of patients undergoing procedural uterine evacuation. STUDY
designWe conducted a retrospective study of patients presenting at an academic referral center for procedural uterine evacuation for abortion or fetal demise from 2/1/2021-1/30/2022. Patients answered a questionnaire at their pre-procedure appointment regarding pregnancy remembrance preferences including viewing the ultrasound examination, receiving ultrasound pictures, information about multiple pregnancy or fetal sex, receiving fetal footprints, recitation of a blessing, and arranging private fetal disposition. We also asked if questioning induced emotional distress. We collected patient demographics, pregnancy gestational age, uterine evacuation indication, and questionnaire data from the electronic medical record. We categorized cases into maternal-fetal indications (fetal anomalies or demise, pregnancy or maternal health complications) and other indications. We tested for associations using chi-square, Fisher's exact, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. We computed odds ratios using multivariate regression analysis adjusted for procedure indication, maternal age, gestational age, and parity.
resultsThe 368 evaluable questionnaires included 94(25.5%) for maternal-fetal and 274(74.5%) for other indications. Overall, 272(74.1%) desired pregnancy remembrance (maternal-fetal indications 77[81.9%]; other indications 195[71.4%], aOR1.96, 95%CI 1.09-3.70). Patients with maternal-fetal indications, as compared to other indications, less frequently requested multiple gestation (16[17.0%] vs 103[37.7%]) and sex information (32[34.0%] vs 137[50.2%]), and more frequently requested footprints (56[59.6%] vs 85[31.1%]), blessing (42[44.7%] vs 68[24.9%]), and private disposition (28[30.1%] vs 16[5.9%]), all p ≤ 0.01. Patients with maternal-fetal indications more frequently reported emotional distress (27/91[29.7%] vs 37/254[14.6%]; aOR 2.11, 95%CI 1.15-3.82), but many (50/64[78.1%]) still desired remembrance.
conclusionMost patients desired pregnancy remembrances regardless of indication, including those patients who reported emotional distress with being asked. IMPLICATIONS: Patients who choose uterine evacuation for both maternal-fetal and other indications commonly want some type of information related to remembering the pregnancy, although those with maternal-fetal indications more frequently desire footprints, fetal blessing and private disposition. Clinics should consider universal inquiry of a desire for pregnancy remembrances.
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.