Antenatal depression in socially high-risk women in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antenatal depression is potentially deleterious to the mother and baby. Canadian Aboriginal women have an increased risk for living in poverty, family violence, and substance use; however, little is known about antenatal depression in this group. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and correlates of depression in socially high-risk, mostly Aboriginal pregnant women. METHODS: Women (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal), in two prenatal outreach programmes were approached and depressive symptoms between the two groups were compared, using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). RESULTS: Sixty per cent (n = 402) of potential participants were recruited for the study. The prevalence of depression was 29.5% (n = 402). Depression was associated with a history of depression, mood swings, increased stressors, current smoker, and lack of social support. Aboriginal women were more likely to be depressed, but this was not significantly higher than non-Aboriginal women; however, they did experience significantly more self-harm thoughts. Exercise was a significant mediator for depression. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of antenatal depression confirms rates in other high-risk, ethnic minority groups of women. A previous history of depression and mood problems were associated with depression, thus prenatal care should include a careful mental health assessment. On a positive note, the present study suggests that exercise may mediate antenatal depression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".