MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225509918 · doi:10.1186/s12884-022-04585-3

Factors affecting the emotional wellbeing of women and men who experience miscarriage in hospital settings: a scoping review

2022· review· en· W4225509918 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Martina Galeotti, Gary Mitchell, Mark Tomlinson, Áine Aventin

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMiscarriageMedicineCINAHLPsycINFOReproductive medicineGriefChecklistDistressAnxietySadnessQualitative researchMEDLINEPsychiatryPsychological interventionClinical psychologyPregnancyPsychologyAnger

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Miscarriage can be a devastating event for women and men that can lead to short- and long-term emotional distress. Studies have reported associations between miscarriage and depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder in women. Men can also experience intense grief and sadness following their partner's miscarriage. While numerous studies have reported hospital-related factors impacting the emotional wellbeing of parents experiencing miscarriage, there is a lack of review evidence which synthesises the findings of current research. AIMS: The aim of this review was to synthesise the findings of studies of emotional distress and wellbeing among women and men experiencing miscarriage in hospital settings. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted in October 2020 across three different databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycInfo) and relevant charity organisation websites, Google, and OpenGrey. A Mixed Methods appraisal tool (MMAT) and AACODS checklist were used to assess the quality of primary studies. RESULTS: Thirty studies were included in this review representing qualitative (N = 21), quantitative (N = 7), and mixed-methods (N = 2) research from eleven countries. Findings indicated that women and men's emotional wellbeing is influenced by interactions with health professionals, provision of information, and the hospital environment. Parents' experiences in hospitals were characterised by a perceived lack of understanding among healthcare professionals of the significance of their loss and emotional support required. Parents reported that their distress was exacerbated by a lack of information, support, and feelings of isolation in the aftermath of miscarriage. Further, concerns were expressed about the hospital environment, in particular the lack of privacy. CONCLUSION: Women and men are dissatisfied with the emotional support received in hospital settings and describe a number of hospital-related factors as exacerbators of emotional distress. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This review highlights the need for hospitals to take evidence-informed action to improve emotional support services for people experiencing miscarriage within their services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207