MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149190568 · doi:10.1136/ebmh.5.4.128

Review: mothers with postpartum depression had to readjust expectations, cope with loss, and find ways to meet needs

2002· letter· en· W2149190568 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy Sword

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Mental Health · 2002
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionCINAHLData extractionMEDLINEInclusion (mineral)MedicineClinical trialSystematic reviewQuality of life (healthcare)PsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyNursingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beck CT. Postpartum depression: a metasynthesis. Qual Health Res2002 Apr ; 12 : 453 –72 .[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: What are the experiences of mothers who have postpartum depression? Studies were identified by searching CINAHL, PsycLIT, Index Medicus, Social Sciences Citation Index, American Humanities Index, Anthropological Literature, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts. Studies were selected if they were qualitative studies on postpartum depression. Data were extracted on the key metaphors in each study and their relations with each other. Reciprocal translations were done so that the metaphors within each study could be related to those of other studies. The translations were synthesised by comparing them and determining the encompassing metaphors and themes. 18 studies (2 unpublished) were included. Study settings were USA (6 studies), UK (8 studies), Australia (3 studies), and Canada (1 study). Study designs included phenomenology (6 studies), general descriptive design (4 studies), ethnography (2 studies), grounded theory (2 studies), and 1 case study. The themes reflected 4 perspectives related to postpartum depression. … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DQualitative%2BHealth%2BResearch%26rft.stitle%253DQual%2BHealth%2BRes%26rft.aulast%253DBeck%26rft.auinit1%253DC.%2BT.%26rft.volume%253D12%26rft.issue%253D4%26rft.spage%253D453%26rft.epage%253D472%26rft.atitle%253DPostpartum%2BDepression%253A%2BA%2BMetasynthesis%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1177%252F104973202129120016%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11939248%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1177/104973202129120016&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11939248&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F5%2F4%2F128.1.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000174511200003&link_type=ISI

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Mental HealthSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207