The Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Web-Based and Home-Based Postnatal Psychoeducational Interventions for First-Time Mothers: Randomized Controlled Trial Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In addition to recuperating from the physical and emotional demands of childbirth, first-time mothers are met with demands of adapting to their social roles while picking up new skills to take care of their newborn. Mothers may not feel adequately prepared for parenthood if they are situated in an unsupported environment. Postnatal psychoeducational interventions have been shown to be useful and can offer a cost-effective solution for improving maternal outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Web-based and home-based postnatal psychoeducational programs for first-time mothers on maternal outcomes. METHODS: A randomized controlled three-group pre- and posttests experimental design is proposed. This study plans to recruit 204 first-time mothers on their day of discharge from a public tertiary hospital in Singapore. Eligible first-time mothers will be randomly allocated to either a Web-based psychoeducation group, a home-based psychoeducation group, or a control group receiving standard care. The outcomes include maternal parental self-efficacy, social support, psychological well-being (anxiety and postnatal depression), and cost evaluation. Data will be collected at baseline, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months post-delivery. RESULTS: The recruitment (n=204) commenced in October 2016 and was completed in February 2017, with 68 mothers in each group. The 6-month follow-up data collection was completed in August 2017. CONCLUSIONS: This study may identify an effective and cost-effective Web-based postnatal psychoeducational program to improve first-time mothers' health outcomes. The provision of a widely-accessed Web-based postnatal psychoeducational program will eventually lead to more positive postnatal experiences for first-time mothers and positively influence their future birth plans. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 45202278; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN45202278 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6whx0pQ2F).
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 | 0.022 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.062 | 0.006 |
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".