Antenatal depressive symptoms among pregnant women: Evidence from a Southern Brazilian population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antenatal depression (AD) is a major public health issue but evidence regarding its prevalence and associated factors in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) is limited. The aim of the study was to estimate the prevalence and identify risk factors for AD among Brazilian pregnant women. METHODS: All women living in the urban area of the city of Pelotas, Southern Brazil, with confirmed pregnancy and estimated delivery date in the year 2015, were invited to take part. Eligible pregnant women were recruited from health services. Symptoms of antenatal depression were assessed using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) by face-to-face interviews. A cutoff-point of 13 or more was used to define probable AD. RESULTS: EPDS scores were available for 4130 women. The prevalence of AD was 16% (95%CI 14·9-17·1). After adjustment for potential confounders, the factors most strongly associated with higher EPDS scores were a previous history of depression (PR 2·81; 95%CI 2·44-3·25), high parity (PR 1·72; 95%CI 1·38-2·15 - ≥2 children vs. 1 child) and maternal education (PR 5·47; 95%CI 4·22-7·09 - 0-4 vs. ≥12 years of formal education). LIMITATIONS: EPDS was administered through face-to-face interviews rather than questionnaires and some women may have felt uncomfortable reporting their symptoms leading to underreporting and consequently underestimation of the prevalence found. CONCLUSION: AD prevalence is substantially higher in Brazil than in high-income countries (HICs) but similar to other LMICs. Our study identified relevant risk factors that may be potential targets to plan interventions, particularly a history of 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".