MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2155276784 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0072216

Impact of a Manualized Multifocal Perinatal Home-Visiting Program Using Psychologists on Postnatal Depression: The CAPEDP Randomized Controlled Trial

2013· article· en· W2155276784 on OpenAlexaff
Romain Dugravier, Florence Tubach, Thomas Saïas, Nicole Guédeney, Blandine Pasquet, Diane Purper‐Ouakil, Susana Tereno, Bertrand Welniarz, Joana Matos, Antoine Guédeney, Tim Greacen

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de Santé Publique du QuébecUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersAssistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)MedicinePhysical therapyPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Postnatal maternal depression (PND) is a significant risk factor for infant mental health. Although often targeted alongside other factors in perinatal home-visiting programs with vulnerable families, little impact on PND has been observed. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the impact on PND symptomatology of a multifocal perinatal home-visiting intervention using psychologists in a sample of women presenting risk factors associated with infant mental health difficulties. METHODS: 440 primiparous women were recruited at their seventh month of pregnancy. All were future first-time mothers, under 26, with at least one of three additional psychosocial risk factors: low educational level, low income, or planning to raise the child without the father. The intervention consisted of intensive multifocal home visits through to the child's second birthday. The control group received care as usual. PND symptomatology was assessed at baseline and three months after birth using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). RESULTS: At three months postpartum, mean (SD) EPDS scores were 9.4 (5.4) for the control group and 8.6 (5.4) for the intervention group (p = 0.18). The difference between the mean EPDS scores was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.35; 1.34). The intervention group had significantly lower EPDS scores than controls in certain subgroups: women with few depressive symptoms at inclusion (EPDS <8): difference = 1.66 (95%CI: 0.17; 3.15), p = 0.05, adjusted for baseline EPDS score), women who were planning to raise the child with the child's father: difference = 1.45 (95%CI: 0.27; 2.62), p = 0.04 (adjusted); women with a higher educational level: difference = 1.59 (95%CI: 0.50; 2.68) p = 0.05 (adjusted). CONCLUSION: CAPEDP failed to demonstrate an overall impact on PND. However, post-hoc analysis reveals the intervention was effective in terms of primary prevention and in subgroups of women without certain risk factors. Effective overall reduction of PND symptomatology for young, first-time mothers presenting additional psychosocial risk factors may require more tailored interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00392847 Promoting Parental Skills and Enhancing Attachment in Early Childhood (CAPEDP).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum→French-language works237,207→