Psychological and socioeconomic factors drive the occurrence of repeated abortions.

the verdict

SUPPORTED

the evidence backs this

Recorded sources

2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Evidence indicates that psychological vulnerability, behavioral traits, and socioeconomic factors such as education and employment status are significant risk factors associated with repeated abortions.

The analysis

Both retrieved empirical and genetic-causal studies (Papers 0 and 2) directly support the claim by identifying specific psychological, behavioral, and socioeconomic risk factors linked to abortion occurrences. Paper 3 is tangential educational literature and thus omitted, leaving the supporting evidence uncontested.

Evidence for · 2

Risk factors among men who have repeated experience of being the partner of a woman who requests an induced abortion

Recorded source metadata

Marlene Makenzius, Tanja Tydén, Elisabeth Darj, Margareta Larsson. Risk factors among men who have repeated experience of being the partner of a woman who requests an induced abortion. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494811435496

Paper [0] identifies socioeconomic vulnerabilities like unemployment and psychological factors such as a history of abuse as independent risk factors for repeated abortions.

Source citation format

See more details

More for · 1

Insights into risk factors of medical abortion: A Mendelian randomization study

Recorded source metadata

Fengping shao. Insights into risk factors of medical abortion: A Mendelian randomization study. 2023. https://doi.org/10.22541/au.169657390.01023407/v1

Paper [2] uses Mendelian randomization to demonstrate causal links between socioeconomic factors like educational attainment and behavioral/psychological traits with abortion risk.

Source citation format

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked01 Aug 2026

judged → SUPPORTED · 8201 Aug 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Phonological evolution involves regular processes of phoneme elision, vowel nasalization, and tonogenesis?Is it true that Hemangiomas are treatable with medication?Is it true that Research identifies forms of intelligence that diverge from standard IQ measures?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt