MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790237022 · doi:10.1097/grf.0000000000000360

A Systematic Review of Integrated Care Interventions Addressing Perinatal Depression Care in Ambulatory Obstetric Care Settings

2018· review· en· W2790237022 on OpenAlexaff
Tiffany A. Moore Simas, Michael P. Flynn, Aimee Kroll‐Desrosiers, STEPHANIE M. CARVALHO, Len Levin, Kathleen Biebel, Nancy Byatt

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsCentre for Family Medicine
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health PromotionNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLPsychological interventionMEDLINEScopusReimbursementSystematic reviewAmbulatory careIntensive care medicineNursingHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This systematic review searched 4 databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsychINFO) and identified 21 articles eligible to evaluate the extent to which interventions that integrate depression care into outpatient obstetric practice are feasible, effective, acceptable, and sustainable. Despite limitations among the available studies including marked heterogeneity, there is evidence supporting feasibility, effectiveness, and acceptability. In general, this is an emerging field with promise that requires additional research. Critical to its real-world success will be consideration for practice workflow and logistics, and sustainability through novel reimbursement mechanisms.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations56
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Obstetrics & GynecologySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207