MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W207812834 · doi:10.1177/070674371205700901

A Tale of 2s: Optimizing Maternal—Child Health in the Context of Antenatal Maternal Depression and Antidepressant Use

2012· editorial· en· W207812834 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Tim F. Oberlander, Katherine L. Wisner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2012
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Institutes of HealthEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsPsychiatryContext (archaeology)MedicineAntidepressantPsychosocialPsychopathologyDepression (economics)Major depressive episodeMoodPsychological interventionPregnancyAntenatal depressionMajor depressive disorderMental healthPharmacotherapyLow birth weightPsychologyAnxietyDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abbreviations 5-HT serotonin AD antidepressant LBW low birth weight MDD major depressive disorder PTB preterm birth SSRI selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor Not a week goes by without new studies reporting on depression during and outcomes following exposure to prenatal SSRIs. Recent public and scientific attention has focused on interpreting contrasting reports of increased risk for congenital anomalies - particularly vascular and cardiac defects' and the apparent lack of risks related to SSRI exposure.21 Reports of neurobehavioural disturbances associated with prenatal SSRI exposure5·6 contrast with other studies that find no increased developmental vulnerability.1·7 This constantly evolving literature raises scientific8 and public9·10 concern about managing mood disorders during pregnancy and conceptualizing the responsible inclusion of pregnant women in medical research.12·13 In this issue of The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 2 key papers address this pressing question.14·15 The paper by Dr Dan Rurak and colleagues (see Shea et al14) highlights key factors that influence fetal drug exposure, and presumably influence the long-term developmental consequences of prenatal drug exposure. Given the variable outcomes associated with pharmacotherapy, the paper by Dr Sherryl H Goodman and Dr Sona Dimidjian15 offers a developmental psychopathology perspective and promising evidence for psychosocial interventions to treat depression during pregnancy. These 2 perspectives offer ways to optimize antenatal mental health treatment and pharmacotherapy to minimize fetal drug exposure. As clinicians, we are frequently faced with questions about how best to promote optimal care for mothers and support development and behaviour in the children of mothers who were depressed during pregnancy. As antenatal maternal mood disorders themselves influence infant and child behaviour,16·17 we are challenged to provide appropriate and timely care when both antenatal SSRI and maternal mood effects are often indistinguishable. To appreciate the impact of these prenatal exposures, we recognize the interplay of 3 key features influencing child development in this setting. This is a story of interplay between the 2s: 2 environmental pathogens - exposure to depressed-anxious maternal mood and SSRI ADs; 2 time periods - spanning pre- and postnatal periods; and 2 highly interrelated individuals, spanning 2 generations - the mother and her infant. Accounting for the ongoing interplay between these factors is essential, but our current understanding of the impact, both of SSRI medications and of psychiatric disorders, on early human development limit our ability to distinguish between the impact of disease and treatment. The incidence and period prevalence of MDDs during are 7.5% and 12.7%, respectively.'8 Although MDD is common, only 1 in 5 Americans receive any guideline-concordant intervention, and most are inadequately treated.6 Treatment rates for mood disorders are even lower for pregnant women (14%) than in the general population of women (26%).7 Pregnancy frequently results in discontinuation of both psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, and women do not resume care in the postpartum period.8 Most women do not receive prescriptions for ADs beyond 6 weeks of gestation. Pregnant women who discontinue ADs proximate to conception have a higher risk for relapse (68%), compared with those who maintain treatment (26%). Although psychotherapy is the preferred treatment of most women,6 it is neither available in all practice settings nor accessible for some mothers. Low treatment rates are juxtaposed against mounting evidence that MDD increases multiple risks for the pregnant woman and fetus. Gestational MDD is associated with risk directly related to the physiological sequelae of psychiatric illness as well as secondary to associated maternal behaviours, such as smoking, poor nutrition, substance abuse, inadequate obstetrical care, and interpersonal isolation and suicide. …

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0130.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum→French-language works237,207→