MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164568274 · doi:10.2196/resprot.4037

An Integrated Web-Based Mental Health Intervention of Assessment-Referral-Care to Reduce Stress, Anxiety, and Depression in Hospitalized Pregnant Women With Medically High-Risk Pregnancies: A Feasibility Study Protocol of Hospital-Based Implementation

2015· article· en· W2164568274 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Dawn Kingston, Selikke Janes-Kelley, Janie Tyrrell, Lorna J. Clark, Deena M. Hamza, Penny Holmes, Cheryl Parkes, Nomagugu Moyo, Sheila McDonald, Marie‐Paule Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchStrongUniversity of AlbertaRoyal Alexandra Hospital FoundationChildren's Health Research Institute
KeywordsMedicineReferralPsychosocialMental healthAnxietyIntervention (counseling)Family medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: At prevalence rates of up to 40%, rates of depression and anxiety among women with medically complex pregnancies are 3 times greater than those in community-based samples of pregnant women. However, mental health care is not a component of routine hospital-based antenatal care for medically high-risk pregnant women. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of the hospital-based implementation of a Web-based integrated mental health intervention comprising psychosocial assessment, referral, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for antenatal inpatients. METHODS: This study is a quasi-experimental design. Pregnant women are eligible to participate if they are (1) <37 weeks gestation, (2) admitted to the antenatal inpatient unit for >72 hours, (3) able to speak and read English or be willing to use a translation service to assist with completion of the questionnaires and intervention, (4) able to complete follow-up email questionnaires, (5) >16 years of age, and (6) not actively suicidal. Women admitted to the unit for induction (eg, <72-hour length of stay) are excluded. A minimum sample of 54 women will be recruited from the antenatal high-risk unit of a large, urban tertiary care hospital. All women will complete a Web-based psychosocial assessment and 6 Web-based CBT modules. Results of the psychosocial assessment will be used by a Web-based clinical decision support system to generate a clinical risk score and clinician prompts to provide recommendations for the best treatment and referral options. The primary outcome is self-reported prenatal depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms at 6-8 weeks postrecruitment. Secondary outcomes are postpartum depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms; self-efficacy; mastery; self-esteem; sleep; relationship quality; coping; resilience; Apgar score; gestational age; birth weight; maternal-infant attachment; infant behavior and development; parenting stress/competence at 3-months postpartum; and intervention cost-effectiveness, efficiency, feasibility, and acceptability. All women will complete email questionnaires at 6-8 weeks postrecruitment and 3-months postpartum. Qualitative interviews with 10-15 health care providers and 15-30 women will provide data on feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: The study was funded in September, 2014 and ethics was approved in November, 2014. Subject recruitment will begin January, 2015 and results are expected in December, 2015. Results of this study will determine (1) the effectiveness of an integrated Web-based prenatal mental health intervention on maternal and infant outcomes and (2) the feasibility of implementation of the intervention on a high-risk antenatal unit. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide evidence and guidance regarding the implementation of a Web-based mental health program into routine hospital-based care for women with medically high-risk pregnancies.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.444 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations48
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207