Mild Depressive Symptoms During the Third Trimester of Pregnancy Are Associated with Disruptions in Daily Rhythms but Not Subjective Sleep Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent research in major depressive disorder suggests that dysregulation of the circadian system may be a core pathophysiological component. In pregnancy, women often experience significant disruptions in their daily rhythms, including changes in day-to-day schedule and sleep habits. Current evidence suggests that these disruptions in daily rhythms may adversely affect underlying circadian rhythmicity. The purpose of our study was to examine whether subjectively rated daily rhythm disruptions were associated with a greater incidence of depressive symptoms during the third trimester. METHOD: Our study was a cross-sectional design, assessing sleep quality, symptoms of depression, and daily rhythm disruptions in 51 pregnant women in their third trimester. RESULTS: We observed a significant relationship between mild depressive symptoms and disruptions in daily rhythms. While we initially observed a strong correlation between subjective sleep quality and depressive symptoms, this was attenuated after accounting for daily rhythm disruptions. Disruptions in daily social rhythms, eating patterns, and general activity were all significantly associated with depressive symptomatology. CONCLUSION: Our findings point to a strong correlation between daily rhythm disruptions and prenatal depressive symptoms. Given that these daily rhythms are known to act as zeitgebers, longitudinal studies examining the directionality of this relationship between circadian rhythms and depressive symptoms during pregnancy are 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".