MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027373195 · doi:10.1111/aogs.13925

Uptrend in distress and psychiatric symptomatology in pregnant women during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

2020· article· en· W3027373195 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDissociative Experiences ScalePregnancyPrenatal carePsychiatryPandemicAnxietyDistressGestational ageOffspringDepression (economics)ObstetricsDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Clinical psychologyInternal medicinePopulationPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Prenatal maternal distress has a negative impact on the course of pregnancy, fetal development, offspring development, and later psychopathologies. The study aimed to determine the extent to which the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic may aggravate the prenatal distress and psychiatric symptomatology of pregnant women. Material and methods Two cohorts of pregnant volunteer women were evaluated, one that was recruited before the COVID‐19 pandemic (n = 496) through advertisements in prenatal clinics in Quebec, Canada, from April 2018 to March 2020; the other (n = 1258) was recruited online during the pandemic from 2 April to 13 April 2020. Prenatal distress and psychiatric symptomatology were measured with the Kessler Distress Scale (K10), Post‐traumatic Checklist for DSM‐5 (PCL‐5), Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES‐II), and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Results The 1754 pregnant women (M age = 29.27, SD = 4.23) were between 4 and 41 gestational weeks (M = 24.80, SD = 9.42), were generally educated (91.3% had post‐high‐school training), and financially well‐resourced (85.3% were above the low‐income cut‐off). A multivariate analysis of covariance controlling for age, gestational age, household income, education, and lifetime psychiatric disorders showed a large effect size (ES) in the difference between the two cohorts on psychiatric symptoms (Wilks’ λ = 0.68, F 6,1400 = 108.50, P < .001, partial η 2 = 0.32). According to post‐hoc analyses of covariance, the COVID‐19 women reported higher levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms (ES = 0.57), dissociative symptoms (ES = 0.22 and ES = 0.25), symptoms of post‐traumatic stress disorder (ES = 0.19), and negative affectivity (ES = 0.96), and less positive affectivity (ES = 0.95) than the pre‐COVID‐19 cohort. Women from the COVID‐19 cohort were more likely than pre‐COVID‐19 women to present clinically significant levels of depressive and anxiety symptoms (OR = 1.94, χ 2 [1] = 10.05, P = .002). Multiple regression analyses indicated that pregnant women in the COVID‐19 cohort having a previous psychiatric diagnosis or low income would be more prone to elevated distress and psychiatric symptoms. Conclusions Pregnant women assessed during the COVID‐19 pandemic reported more distress and psychiatric symptoms than pregnant women assessed before the pandemic, mainly in the form of depression and anxiety symptoms. Given the harmful consequences of prenatal distress on mothers and offspring, the presently observed upsurge of symptoms in pregnant women calls for special means of clinical surveillance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.758

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.281 · 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