Mental disorders in pregnant and lactating women deprived of liberty in the prison system: systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: Female incarceration has increased due to several factors, including changes in criminal policies, social and economic inequalities, abuse of psychoactive substances and issues related to gender and mental health. Being a woman and experiencing pregnancy or lactation in the prison system can be an even more challenging and difficult experience due to precarious sanitary conditions, lack of adequate medical care, stigma, isolation and separation from the child. Objective: Analyze mental disorders among pregnant and lactating women in the female prison system. Method: This is a systematic review, which evaluates and brings together similar studies for statistical analysis. To write this review, the PRISMA checklist guidelines were followed. Furthermore, the protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) platform, under registration number CRD42022350737. Using the PECOT strategy (Population, Exposure, Control, Outcomes/Outcomes and Types of Studies/Observational), the research question was constructed: “what are the mental disorders among pregnant and lactating women in the female prison system?” Included were studies on pregnant women and the development of mental disorders (depression, anxiety, stress and insomnia, postpartum depression) during incarceration in comparison to pregnant women not exposed to incarceration or deprivation of liberty in the prison system. Literature reviews, case series, case reports and qualitative studies were not considered. Searches were carried out in the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS), Scopus and Nursing Database (BDENF), without restriction on the language of the articles or of the year of publication. The search strategy used medical subjective vocabularies (MeSH) and a variety of other keywords. To assess the risk of bias, the Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the research, while the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Developing and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to classify the evidence into the quality levels of the studies. Results: Of the 2165 studies found, the final sample consisted of four articles. The analysis and level of methodological quality were carried out, as well as the strength of recommendation of the evidence with the GRADE system. The studies were carried out in the last decade, in the United States and Canada and evaluated regarding characteristics, implementation and evaluation of the evidence. The prevalent mental disorders found in pregnant and lactating women in the women's prison system were anxiety, common mental disorders, schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and postpartum depression. It is believed that the prevalence outcomes presented a risk of bias to the detriment of contextual specificity, making the results provocative for carrying out interventions in the scenario. Final considerations: It was concluded that there is an increase in mental disorders in pregnant and lactating women in the prison system, indicating a growing trend, as the context of imprisonment increases illness and psychological suffering. However, it is suggested that new studies be carried out to better elucidate the prison scenario, as well as to develop measurement instruments/scales aimed at the prison scenario due to the uniqueness of the environment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,009 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».