ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2026
Pregnancy Decision-Making Among Women With Physical Disabilities: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pregnancy Outcomes Among Individuals With Cerebral Palsy: A Population-Based Cohort Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveUnderstand the pregnancy informational needs and decision-making of women with physical disabilities.
designCross-sectional.
settingCommunity. SAMPLE: 114 adult American women with physical disabilities who had experience making a decision about pregnancy while disabled.
methodsOnline survey.
main outcome measuresPregnancy information needs and decision-making survey.
resultsAmong the most important factors (very much-quite a bit) for decision-making were risks to the baby (72.8%) and themselves (58.7%), happiness of their partner (65.8%), and long-term effects of pregnancy on health (58.8%). Most had the least (not at all-a little bit) knowledge about equipment to care for an infant (57.9%), how to adapt as their body changed (54.4%), or ways to care for their infant (53.5%). Most had some to a lot of confidence (66.7%) in healthcare providers' recommendations but were highly variable about how much their individual concerns were understood. Important information (very much-quite a bit) included other health problems (92.5%), caring for an infant (94.2%), medications (88.4%), ambulation (78.5%), balance problems (82.6%), and spasticity (68.2%); this information was often difficult to find and unhelpful. Others were helpful when engaging in realistic discussions, being emotionally supportive, and providing financial and physical support. Healthcare providers were supportive when setting realistic expectations, providing non-biased information, discussing risks, providing reassurance, and collaborating with other specialists.
conclusionsWhile pregnancy decision-making was challenging, participants had realistic concerns, often amplified by their disability and disability-related concerns. These results highlight areas where interventions can be developed to improve the experience of pregnancy decision-making.
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.