MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944077649 · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2013.1564

Women’s Experiences with Postpartum Anxiety: Expectations, Relationships, and Sociocultural Influences

2015· article· en· W1944077649 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Allegra Maureen Wardrop, Natalee Popadiuk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Qualitative Report · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologySociocultural evolutionQualitative researchDistressDevelopmental psychologyPostpartum periodCoding (social sciences)Clinical psychologyPregnancyPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence about anxiety in the postpartum is sparse and contradictory. Our research expands this knowledge by using a qualitative methodology, the Feminist Biographical Method, to explore first time mothers’ experiences of postpartum anxiety. Data collection included 1.5 to 2.0 hour interviews with six women about their experiences of anxiety in their transition to motherhood. We transcribed the interviews and used an iterative hermeneutic coding process to develop themes and subthemes over the course of four coding cycles. The findings include five major themes: (a) experiences of anxiety, (b) expectations of a new mother, (c) issues of support, (d) societal scripts of motherhood, and (e) the transition. One conclusion that we draw is the need for healthcare professionals to provide improved support and validation to new mothers facing postpartum anxiety, by expanding the definition of postpartum distress, especially anxiety, and by better understanding women’s anxiety through culturally - embedded contextual and relational lenses.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations49
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Qualitative ReportSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207