More than depression: a multi-dimensional assessment of postpartum distress symptoms before and after a residential early parenting program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Parents are vulnerable to psychological distress symptoms in the postpartum period. It is routine to screen for depressive symptoms, but anxiety, stress, fatigue, irritability and insomnia symptoms are less often assessed despite their prevalence. This study aimed to assess multiple dimensions of psychological distress, and their reliable change and clinically significant change among women admitted to a residential program for assistance with unsettled infant behaviors (UIB). METHOD: Women admitted to a five-night residential early parenting program completed self-report measures: the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, Irritability Depression Anxiety Scale, Fatigue Severity Scale, and Insomnia Severity Index. A sub-group completed a computerized emotional Go-NoGo (EGNG) task as a measure of emotional impulsivity. RESULTS: = 4.16). On admission, 48% of women reported clinically elevated depressive symptoms and 97.5% of women not reporting elevated depressive symptoms reported clinical elevations in at least one other form of distress. Upon discharge, all self-report distress symptoms were significantly reduced (all p-values <.001), but reliable and clinically significant change only occurred in a subgroup of women. There were no significant changes in indicators of impulsivity based on the EGNG. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to, and often in the absence of, depressive symptoms, women attending an early parenting program experienced a wide range of psychological distress, including fatigue, insomnia, anxiety and stress. Different forms of distress improved in different magnitudes to the treatment provided. These findings highlight the need for a multi-dimensional approach in the assessment and treatment of postpartum distress.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".