Perceptions of Predisposing and Protective Factors for Perinatal Depression in Same‐Sex Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increasing numbers of women are choosing to have children in the context of same-sex relationships or as "out" lesbian or bisexual individuals. This study used qualitative methods to assess perceived predisposing and protective factors for perinatal depression in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) women. Two focus groups with LGBQ women were conducted: 1) biological parents of young children and 2) nonbiological parents of young children or whose partners were currently pregnant. Three major themes emerged. Issues related to social support were primary, particularly related to disappointment with the lack of support provided by members of the family of origin. Participants also described issues related to the couple relationship, such as challenges in negotiating parenting roles. Finally, legal and policy barriers (e.g., second parent adoption) were identified as a significant source of stress during the transition to parenthood. Both lack of social support and relationship problems have previously been identified as risk factors for perinatal depression in heterosexual women, and legal and policy barriers may represent a unique risk factor for this population. Therefore, additional study of perinatal mental health among LGBQ women is warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".