Predictors of parenting outcome in women with psychotic disorders discharged from mother and baby units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the social and clinical characteristics of mothers with psychotic disorders with parenting difficulties, with mothers with no significant parenting problems. METHOD: Descriptive and case-control study. RESULTS: Over half of the women with psychotic disorders admitted to psychiatric mother and baby units had a good outcome at the time of discharge--70% did not need social services supervision, and had no significant parenting problem as judged by clinical staff. Diagnosis was independently associated with all measures of poor parenting; compared with a diagnosis of psychotic depression, a diagnosis of schizophrenia was highly significantly associated with social services supervision [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 25.7; 95% CI 5.97, 111.05], and staff rated problems with emotional responsiveness (adjusted OR 3.39;95% CI 1.42, 8.08), practical baby care (adjusted OR 6.07; 95% CI 2.12, 17.39), and perceived risk of harm to baby (adjusted OR 7.81; 95% CI. 2, 30.53). Low social class and psychiatric illness in the partner were also significantly associated with poor parenting outcomes, including social services supervision (adjusted OR 3.88; 95% CI 2.07, 7.25 and 4.23; 95% CI 2.1, 8.55, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although these associations do not demonstrate causality, these findings suggest preventative interventions targeting socio-economic difficulties, early treatment of psychosis, and detection and treatment of psychiatric problems in the partner may be helpful in improving parenting outcomes in these vulnerable families.
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 | 0.000 | 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".