Negative abortion experiences: predictors and development of post-abortion psychological and relational adjustment scale.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q3 LAW Issues in Law & Medicine Pub Date : 2018-01-01
Priscilla K Coleman
{"title":"Negative abortion experiences: predictors and development of post-abortion psychological and relational adjustment scale.","authors":"Priscilla K Coleman","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Associations between several personal and contextual predic-tors of negative post-abortion mental health outcomes were explored using a large national sample of U.S. women who sought out post-abortion care from a crisis pregnancy center. The predictors examined included decisional regret, pregnancy wantedness, various forms of pressure, understanding of the procedure, and satisfaction with counseling provided by the abortion facility. Well-established measures of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse in addition to a newly developed assessment of abortion-related out-comes, the Post-Abortion Psychological and Relational Adjustment Scale (PAPRAS) were employed as the criteria in regression models. All analyses included controls for pre-abortion psychological adjustment and various forms of abuse in addition to a number of demographic variables. When the PAPRAS served as the outcome measure, the abortion context variables as a group accounted for 45.8% of the variance in women's post-abortion psychological and relational adjustment scores. Using the same sets of pre-dictors in a series of regression models and employing established measures of general anxiety, depression, PTSD, alcohol abuse, and substance abuse, 3.5% to 8.8% of the variance was explained. Based on psychometric analy-sis of the PAPRAS, there is evidence that this newly developed instrument holds promise for addressing the unique post-abortion mental health and relational concerns of women.</p>","PeriodicalId":48665,"journal":{"name":"Issues in Law & Medicine","volume":"33 2","pages":"133-162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues in Law & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Associations between several personal and contextual predic-tors of negative post-abortion mental health outcomes were explored using a large national sample of U.S. women who sought out post-abortion care from a crisis pregnancy center. The predictors examined included decisional regret, pregnancy wantedness, various forms of pressure, understanding of the procedure, and satisfaction with counseling provided by the abortion facility. Well-established measures of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse in addition to a newly developed assessment of abortion-related out-comes, the Post-Abortion Psychological and Relational Adjustment Scale (PAPRAS) were employed as the criteria in regression models. All analyses included controls for pre-abortion psychological adjustment and various forms of abuse in addition to a number of demographic variables. When the PAPRAS served as the outcome measure, the abortion context variables as a group accounted for 45.8% of the variance in women's post-abortion psychological and relational adjustment scores. Using the same sets of pre-dictors in a series of regression models and employing established measures of general anxiety, depression, PTSD, alcohol abuse, and substance abuse, 3.5% to 8.8% of the variance was explained. Based on psychometric analy-sis of the PAPRAS, there is evidence that this newly developed instrument holds promise for addressing the unique post-abortion mental health and relational concerns of women.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
负面流产经历:预测因素及流产后心理与关系调整量表的编制。
研究人员对从危机妊娠中心寻求流产后护理的美国妇女进行了大规模的全国抽样调查,探讨了流产后心理健康负面结果的几个个人和环境预测因素之间的联系。预测因素包括决定后悔、想要怀孕、各种形式的压力、对程序的理解以及对堕胎机构提供的咨询服务的满意度。在回归模型中,采用成熟的抑郁、焦虑和药物滥用测量方法,以及新开发的人工流产相关结果评估,人工流产后心理和相关调整量表(PAPRAS)作为标准。除了一些人口变量外,所有分析都包括对堕胎前心理调整和各种形式的虐待的控制。当PAPRAS作为结果测量时,流产情境变量作为一个组占妇女流产后心理和关系调整得分方差的45.8%。在一系列回归模型中使用相同的预测因子集,并采用一般焦虑、抑郁、创伤后应激障碍、酗酒和药物滥用的既定测量方法,可以解释3.5%至8.8%的差异。根据PAPRAS的心理测量分析,有证据表明,这种新开发的工具有望解决妇女堕胎后独特的心理健康和关系问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Issues in Law & Medicine
Issues in Law & Medicine Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Issues in Law & Medicine is a peer reviewed professional journal published semiannually. Founded in 1985, ILM is co-sponsored by the National Legal Center for the Medically Dependent & Disabled, Inc. and the Watson Bowes Research Institute. Issues is devoted to providing technical and informational assistance to attorneys, health care professionals, educators and administrators on legal, medical, and ethical issues arising from health care decisions. Its subscribers include law libraries, medical libraries, university libraries, court libraries, attorneys, physicians, university professors and other scholars, primarily in the U.S. and Canada, but also in Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Japan, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom.
期刊最新文献
A Reanalysis of Mental Disorders Risk Following First-Trimester Abortions in Denmark. In Vitro Fertilization, State Wrongful Death Statutes and State Fetal Homicide Statutes: The Reaction to LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine. International Standards and Features of Financing in the Field of Health Care and Provision of Medical Services. Misleading Statements About "Life of the Mother" Exceptions in Pro-life Laws Require Correction. State Regulation of Ensuring the Quality Medical Care During Martial Law in Ukraine: Lessons for the International Community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1