Appraisal of the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire in a perinatal cohort: The APrON study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety are routinely screened as part of perinatal care. However, other Axis 1 disorders and specific anxiety disorders are less likely to be screened or assessed as part of obstetric care. The objective of this study was to determine whether the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire (PDSQ) is a potentially useful tool to screen for psychiatric conditions in pregnant and postpartum women in a community setting. METHODS: We compared the prevalence of DSM Axis I disorders obtained on the PDSQ with: (1) the prevalence of these disorders reported in previous studies of pregnant and postpartum women, and (2) scores obtained on the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS) and the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90R) anxiety scale. Data were obtained from the Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) study. RESULTS: The PDSQ was completed by 1575 women prenatally and 1481 postnatally. The three most prevalent PDSQ conditions were social phobia, somatic disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The prevalence of social phobia, alcohol disorder, OCD and psychosis were higher in the APrON cohort compared with statistics in the literature. The proportion of women meeting depression and anxiety cut-offs on the PDSQ were lower than for the EPDS and the SCL-90R. The Cohens Kappa index ( k) indicated poor to fair agreement between the measures in classifying pregnant women as depressed or anxious. CONCLUSIONS: The PDSQ subscales may not be appropriate for the pregnant population. Research into instruments more specific to pregnant and postpartum women are needed to determine the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in this population.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".