ArticlePloS one2026
Navigating grief and healthcare: Mixed-methods study on patient experiences of miscarriage during COVID-19.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper aims to understand the patient experiences of women who suffered a miscarriage during the COVID-19 pandemic and examine the relationships of patient experience with miscarriage management, psychological distress, and COVID-19-related stressors. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design combined cross-sectional survey data and qualitative descriptive interviews. Seventy-one women in North Carolina who experienced a miscarriage during the COVID-19 stay-at-home mandates were assessed on patient experience, miscarriage management, perceived stress, anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress, and COVID-19-related stressors. In-depth interviews were conducted with a subsample of 18 participants. Quantitative and qualitative findings of the subsample were integrated using a joint display to examine the level of convergence. Approximately half of participants reported poor patient experiences (52%), and half reported good patient experiences (48%). COVID-19-related stressors, including inability to have a support person present and access to care disruptions, did not differ significantly between groups. Participants reporting poor patient experiences had significantly higher levels of perceived stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms (p < .05). Among those receiving medical and/or surgical management, good patient experiences were associated with lower psychological distress; this pattern was not observed among participants undergoing expectant management. Qualitative findings identified four categories shaping miscarriage care: Access to Care, Healthcare Provider Interactions, Healthcare Support Staff Interactions, and Healthcare System Interactions. Data integration demonstrated strong convergence for all four subcategories of the Healthcare Provider Interactions category; moderate convergence for access to care; and weak convergence for healthcare support staff interactions and healthcare system interactions. Findings underscore the central role of provider and nursing interpersonal care in shaping patient experiences and psychological well-being following miscarriage, even amid COVID-19-related system disruptions. Results highlight the need for structured follow-up, emotionally supportive care, and attention to organizational policies to improve miscarriage care during public health crises.
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.