Evaluation of a family nursing intervention for distressed pregnant women and their partners: a single group before and after study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To report a study of the effects of an antenatal family nursing intervention for emotionally distressed women and their partners. BACKGROUND: High levels of depressive symptoms and anxiety are common in pregnant women, and their partners are likely to suffer from a higher degree of these symptoms than those of non-distressed women. Maternal anxiety and depressive symptoms influence the development of the foetus and child negatively. Distress-reducing interventions for couples are scarce. DESIGN: The design was a pre- and post-test single group quasi-experiment. METHODS: All women distressed during the last two trimesters of pregnancy were referred by midwives to a family nursing home-visiting service in a primary care setting in Iceland. They were invited to participate in the study from November 2007-September 2009. The final sample was 39 couples. Assessment of distress was through self-reporting of depressive symptoms and anxiety, self-esteem, and dyadic adjustment. The couple received four home visits that were guided by the Calgary Family Nursing Model. RESULTS: Women experienced a higher degree of distress than men before the intervention. Couple's distress was interrelated, and improvement was significant on all indicators after the intervention. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals who care for distressed expectant women should attend to their partners' mental health status. The Calgary Family Nursing Model is an appropriate guide for nursing care of distressed prospective couples in a primary care setting.
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".