MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047945885 · doi:10.1097/aog.0000000000004003

Reducing the Risk for Postpartum Depression in Adolescent Mothers

2020· article· en· W3047945885 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen G. Phipps, Crystal F. Ware, Robert L. Stout, Christina Raker, Caron Zlotnick

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsMedicinePostpartum depressionRandomized controlled trialInterpersonal psychotherapyDepression (economics)PregnancyPsychological interventionPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of an interpersonal therapy-based intervention on reducing the risk of postpartum depression in adolescents. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial enrolled 250 pregnant adolescents who were aged 18 years or younger at conception. The initial sample size calculation estimated 276 participants (324 with attrition) were needed to detect a 50% reduction in risk of the primary outcome, postpartum major depressive episode, with an alpha of 0.05% and 80% power. An interim analysis by the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee informed a revision in the sample size target to 250. Participants were randomized to the intervention (n=129) or a time-matched control group (n=121) who attended sessions about pregnancy topics. Each group received five prenatal sessions and a postpartum booster session. A structured diagnostic interview was administered at baseline and specific time points through 12-months postpartum to assess for major depressive episode onset. RESULTS: Participants were recruited from December 2011 to May 2016 through urban prenatal care sites in the state of Rhode Island. Of the 250 participants, 58% identified as Hispanic and 20% as black or African American. The rate of major depressive episode by 12 months postpartum was 7.0% (95% CI 2.3-11.7%) in the control group and 7.6% (95% CI 2.5-12.7%) in the intervention group, with no significant difference between groups at any time point (P=.88 by log-rank test). CONCLUSION: No benefit was shown between the intervention and control groups in the rates of major depressive episode, which is likely related to a lower than predicted rate of this outcome in the control group (7.6% actual vs 25% predicted). Enhanced local community resources available to pregnant and parenting adolescents during the study period may be an explanation for this result. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01482832.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207