Contributors to Depressed Mood in Black Single Mothers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participants: A convenience sample of 210 community dwelling Black single mothers ages 18 to 45, who reside in U.S. urban communities.Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional design was employed. Participants responded to an open-ended question that asked about reasons for depressed mood. A directed approach to content analysis was used to categorize the responses based on existing theoretical formulations and empirical findings about the causes of depression in women. Percentages and frequencies were used to describe the results of the analysis.Findings: A total of 319 usable responses were provided. Collectively and individually the most frequent responses were consistent with Social/Environmental factors such as lack of financial resources (n = 115; 36.05%), followed by Psychological factors such as general cognitive/emotional feelings of stress (n = 60; 18.81%), and parenting stressors or daily hassles (n = 40; 12.54%). Physiologic factors such as a having physiologic or medical conditions were reported less often (n = 14; 4.39%).Conclusions/Implications: Social/Environmental and Psychological factors contribute to depressed mood more often than Physiological factors in Black single mothers. Depression prevention efforts should target the social determinants of mental health in Black single mothers who should be connected with appropriate financial, psychological, educational and social service resources in the community.
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".