Decision-making in case of an unintended pregnancy: an overview of what is known about this complex process

References

• Abajobir AA, Maravilla JC, Alati R, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the association between unintended pregnancy and perinatal depression. J Affective Disord. 2016;192:1–13. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2015.12.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990-2019. Lancet. 2020;8:e1152–e61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijkstra CI, Dalmijn EW, Bolt SH, et al. Women with unwanted pregnancies, their psychosocial problems, and contraceptive use in primary care in Northern Netherlands: insights from a primary care registry database. Fam Pract. 2023;40(5–6):648–654. doi:10.1093/fampra/cmad036
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Brouwershaven AC, Dijkstra CI, Bolt SH, et al. Discovering a pregnancy after 30 weeks: a qualitative study on explanations for unperceived pregnancy. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2023;44(1):2197139. doi:10.1080/0167482X.2023.2197139
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aiken ARA, Borrero S, Callegari LS, et al. Rethinking the pregnancy planning paradigm: unintended conceptions or unrepresentative concepts? Perspect Sexual Reprod Health. 2016;48:147. doi:10.1363/48e10316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auerbach SL, Coleman-Minahan K, Alspaugh A, et al. Critiquing the unintended pregnancy framework. J Midwif Women’s Health. 2023;68:170–178. doi:10.1111/jmwh.13457
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sprenger M, Beumer WY, van Ditzhuijzen J, et al. 2023. Psychometric properties of the dutch london measure of unplanned pregnancy for pregnant people and their partners. medRxiv: 2023.11.13.23298453.
   Google Scholar
• Santelli J, Rochat R, Hatfield Timajchy K, et al. The measurement and meaning of unintended pregnancy. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2003;35(2):94–101. doi:10.1363/3509403
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brauer M, van Nijnatten C, Vollebergh WA. 2012. Besluitvorming rondom ongewenste zwangerschap. Een kwalitatief onderzoek onder vrouwen die tot een abortus hebben besloten en vrouwen die tot het uitdragen van hun zwangerschap hebben besloten. Utrecht: Universiteit van Utrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Reproductive Rights. 2023. ‘The World’s Abortion Laws’. https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/.
   Google Scholar
• Brauer M, van Ditzhuijzen J, Boeije H, et al. Understanding decision-making and decision difficulty in women With an unintended pregnancy in The Netherlands. Qual Health Res. 2019;29:1084–1095. doi:10.1177/1049732318810435
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowland BB, Rocca CH, Ralph LJ. Certainty and intention in pregnancy decision-making: an exploratory study. Contraception. 2021;103(2):80–85. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2020.11.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Heij A. Besluitvorming bij ongewenste zwangerschap en online hulp bij abortusverwerking. Twee bronnen voor nieuw perspectief op preventie van psychosociale klachten na abortus. Tijdschrift Voor Seksuologie. 2017;41:127–232.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Sijpt E. 2014. Complexities and contingencies conceptualised: towards a model of reproductive navigation. From Health Behaviours to Health Practices 120–31.
   Google Scholar
• Tiemeijer WL. 2011. Hoe mensen keuzes maken. De psychologie van het beslissen. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Fiom. 2020. “Factsheet online module ‘Zwanger, wat nu?’ 2015-2019.”
   Google Scholar
• Ueno Y, Mitsuko O, Kako M, et al. Shared desicion making for women facing an unplanned pregnancy: a qualitative study. Nurs Health Sci. 2020;22(4):1186–1196. doi:10.1111/nhs.12791
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elizalde S, Mateo N. Young women: between the "green tide" and the decision to have an abortion]. Salud Colect. 2018;14(3):433–446. doi:10.18294/sc.2018.2026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jovel I, Cartwright A, Ralph L, et al. Understanding decision certainly AMONG women searching online FOR abortion care. Contraception. 2019;100:316–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Ditzhuijzen J, Ten Have M, de Graaf R, et al. The impact of psychiatric history on women’s pre- and postabortion experiences. Contraception. 2015;92(3):246–253. doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2015.05.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrari R. Writing narrative style literature reviews. Med Writing. 2015;24(4):230–235. doi:10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329
   Google Scholar
• Jordan Z, Lockwood C, Munn Z, et al. The updated joanne briggs institute model of Evidence-Based healthcare. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2018;16(4):227–241. doi:10.1097/XEB.0000000000000139
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moreau C, Bohet A, Le Guen M, et al. Unplanned or unwanted? A randomized study of national estimates of pregnancy intentions. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(6):1663–1670. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.08.011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helfferich C, Hessling A, Klindworth H, et al. 2014. Unintended pregnancy in the life-course perspective. Adv Life Course Res 21:74–86. doi:10.1016/j.alcr.2014.04.002
   Google Scholar
• Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated critera for reporting qualitative research (COREQ); a 32-item checlist for interviews and focusgroups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–357. doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting obersvational studies. Bull World Health Organ. 2007;85(11):867–872. doi:10.2471/blt.07.045120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page M, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):89. doi:10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luna F. Identifying and evaluating layers of vulnerability - a way forward. Dev World Bioeth. 2018;19(2):86–95. doi:10.1111/dewb.12206
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahlin Marceta J. A non-ideal authenticity-based conceptualization of personal autonomy. Med Health Care Philos. 2019;22:387–395. doi:10.1007/s11019-018-9879-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chibber KS, Biggs MA, Roberts SC, et al. The role of intimate partners in women’s reasons for seeking abortion. Womens Health Issues. 2014;24:e131-8. doi:10.1016/j.whi.2013.10.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman M, Rowe H, Hardiman A, et al. Reasons women give for abortion; a review of the literature. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2009;12(6):365–378. doi:10.1007/s00737-009-0084-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boholm Å, Henning A, Krzyworzeka A. Anthropology and decision making: an introduction. Focaal. 2013;2013(65):97–113. doi:10.3167/fcl.2013.650109
   Google Scholar
• Bruch. Decision-Making processes in social contexts. Annu Rev Sociol. 2017;43:207–227. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-060116-053622
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olthuis G, Leget C, Grypdonck M. Shared decision making needs a care perspective. BMJ. 2012;345(v06 15):e7419–e7419. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7419
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Nistelrooij I, Visse M, Spekkink A, et al. How shared is shared decision-making? A care-ethical view on the role of partner and family. J Med Ethics. 2017;43(9):637–644. doi:10.1136/medethics-2016-103791
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Nistelrooij I, van der Waal R. Moederschap en geboorte: relationaliteit als alternatieve ethische benadering. Tijdschrift Voor Gezondheidszorg En Ethiek. 2019;29:53–57.
   Google Scholar
• Hermans HJM. Self as a society of I positions: a dialogical approach to counseling. J Hum Counsel. 2014;53(2):134–159. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1939.2014.00054.x
   Google Scholar