Psychological interventions for maternal depression among women of African and Caribbean origin: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal depression is a leading cause of disease burden for women worldwide; however, there are ethnic inequalities in access to psychological interventions in high-income countries (HICs). Culturally appropriate interventions might prove beneficial for African and Caribbean women living in HICs as ethnic minorities. METHODS: The review strategy was formulated using the PICo (Population, phenomenon of Interest, and Context) framework with Boolean operators (AND/OR/NOT) to ensure rigour in the use of search terms ("postpartum depression", "maternal depression", "postnatal depression", "perinatal depression" "mental health", "psychotherapy" "intervention", "treatment", "black Caribbean", "black African", "mothers" and "women"). Five databases, including Scopus, PsycINFO, Applied Social Science Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), ProQuest Central and Web of Science, were searched for published articles between 2000 and July 2020. 13 studies met the inclusion criteria, and the relevant data extracted were synthesised and thematically analysed. RESULTS: Data syntheses and analyses of included studies produced four themes, including (1) enhance parenting confidence and self-care; (2) effective mother-child interpersonal relationship; (3) culturally appropriate maternal care; and (4) internet-mediated care for maternal depression. CONCLUSION: In the quest to address maternal mental health disparities among mothers of African and Caribbean origin in HICs, the authors recommend culturally adapted psychological interventions to be tested in randomised control trials.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| 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".