Effect of peer support on prevention of postnatal depression among high risk women: multisite randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of telephone based peer support in the prevention of postnatal depression. DESIGN: Multisite randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Seven health regions across Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 701 women in the first two weeks postpartum identified as high risk for postnatal depression with the Edinburgh postnatal depression scale and randomised with an internet based randomisation service. INTERVENTION: Proactive individualised telephone based peer (mother to mother) support, initiated within 48-72 hours of randomisation, provided by a volunteer recruited from the community who had previously experienced and recovered from self reported postnatal depression and attended a four hour training session. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Edinburgh postnatal depression scale, structured clinical interview-depression, state-trait anxiety inventory, UCLA loneliness scale, and use of health services. RESULTS: After web based screening of 21 470 women, 701 (72%) eligible mothers were recruited. A blinded research nurse followed up more than 85% by telephone, including 613 at 12 weeks and 600 at 24 weeks postpartum. At 12 weeks, 14% (40/297) of women in the intervention group and 25% (78/315) in the control group had an Edinburgh postnatal depression scale score >12 (chi(2)=12.5, P<0.001; number need to treat 8.8, 95% confidence interval 5.9 to 19.6; relative risk reduction 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.62). There was a positive trend in favour of the intervention group for maternal anxiety but not loneliness or use of health services. For ethical reasons, participants identified with clinical depression at 12 weeks were referred for treatment, resulting in no differences between groups at 24 weeks. Of the 221 women in the intervention group who received and evaluated their experience of peer support, over 80% were satisfied and would recommend this support to a friend. CONCLUSION: Telephone based peer support can be effective in preventing postnatal depression among women at high risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 68337727.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".