Systematic Review of the Literature on Postpartum Care: Methodology and Literature Search Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The postpartum period is a time for multiple clinical interventions. To date, no critical review of these interventions exists. This systematic review examined evidence for the effectiveness of postpartum interventions that have been reported in the literature. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cinahl, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials of interventions initiated from immediately after birth to 1 year in postnatal women that were conducted in North America, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand. The initial literature search was done in 1999, using postpartum content search terms, and was enhanced in 2003. In both years, bibliographic databases were searched from their inception. Studies were categorized into key topic areas. Data extraction forms were developed and completed for each study, and the quality of each study was systematically reviewed. Groups of studies in a topic area were reviewed together, and clinically relevant questions emanating from the studies were identified to determine whether the studies, alone or together, provided evidence to support the clinical intervention. RESULTS: In the 1999 search, of 671 studies identified, 140 studies were randomized controlled trials that met the selection criteria: 41 studies related to breastfeeding, 33 to postpartum perineal pain management, and 63 to 11 other key topic areas (Papanicolaou test, rubella immunization, contraception, postpartum support, early discharge, postpartum depression and anxiety, postpartum medical disorders, smoking cessation, nutrition supplements other than breastfeeding, effects of pelvic floor exercise, and effects of early newborn contact). The results of the systematic review of each topic will be summarized in separate papers as they are completed. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic search has identified key topic areas in postpartum care for which randomized controlled trials have been conducted. Our ultimate goal is to provide evidence-based guidelines on the use of routine postpartum interventions.
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 | 0.065 | 0.187 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.047 | 0.053 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
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".