ArticleStudies in family planning2026
Decision-Making and Family Planning among People with Clinical Depressiveness-Findings from a Representative German Panel Study.
Article in Studies in family planning, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personally important decisions, like reproductive choices, may be challenging for individuals with clinical depressiveness, as indecisiveness is a common depressive symptom. This study examines whether decision-making modes related to reproductive behavior differ between individuals with and without clinical depressiveness (H1) and whether these modes remain stable over time, even after the birth of the first child (H2). Data stem from the German Panel Analysis of Intimate Relationships and Family Dynamics (pairfam). Clinical depressiveness was measured using State-Trait Depression Scales and decision-making modes through items on reproductive behavior. H1 was analyzed using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) and post hoc analysis of variance (ANOVA); H2 via fixed-effect regressions and cross-lagged panel model. A significant group difference emerged in the combined decision-making modes (Pillai's trace = 0.009, F(6, 4832) = 7.32, p < 0.001). Individuals with clinical depressiveness engaged more in rational and avoidant modes, whereas those without favored normative decision-making. Decision-making remained stable between subjects; within-subject analyses showed alterations over time. Between subjects, decision-making remained stable. Characteristics of depressive symptoms and individual circumstances may explain the results. Future research should incorporate other clinical conditions and qualitative analyses. Practitioners should consider individual costs, benefits, and decisional postponement.
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.